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.

 

O'Keefe drops #CNNLeaks

page: 6
74
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 04:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT
@3:30 in the video...is PROOF that CNN was passing off biased and outdated election poll numbers as new and "just released" ...in order to help Hillary.


Oh FFS...Listen to the audio...The poll was taken 28th, 29th..She was upset that it wasn't updated with numbers after the 30th...and she googled to find OTHER headlines citing the poll as "just released"...That's why he says "how are we writing about it"...and she hmms and haws...Her idea was to have CNN cite a more recent RASMUSSEN poll? No of course CNN is going to report on their own polls and not Rassmussen...Rassmussen doesn't update their polling numbers with CNNs either..Just cuz Rasmussen did a more recent poll by a couple days...doesn't mean CNN is obligated to update their polling with Rassmussen's numbers?...WTF?

What stupidity...

BTW anytime someone shout "PROOF" in all caps?...I know it is going to be utter BS.
edit on 23-2-2017 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 04:55 PM
link   
It was the CIA's public release regarding Russia's election hacking that gets me. A solid chunk of that document was comparing CNN to RT (Russian news) and showing how much less people were watching CNN. No other networks. Why did they pick CNN if Fox is more mainstream. Including it in the document means they were concerned about CNN's influence. Why would they be concerned about that if not because they use that particular network for psyops.



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 04:57 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss


AND ALSO...

I find it hilarious that O'Keefe needs to crowdsource a million right wing fanatics to listen to 100's of hours of audio in search of errors or # to spin into BS...

While anyone who wants to find bald face lies, just has to tune into any given press conference from the whitehouse..or listen to any WH spokesperson talk for 5 minutes..

Remember Bowling Greene!



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 05:23 PM
link   
Actually, If my Aunt had balls she would be my uncle.
a reply to: Stevenjames15



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 06:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

Not everyone listening to any particular tape will inherently know who is doing the talking, and the exact ramifications of what is being said, was my immediate impression once I actually went trying to get the player to load me a clip.

You get the Online Community (OC) playing it and that would solve those kinds of hitches, no?



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 06:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Maybe you are oblivious to being controlled opposition.

Exposing things the best you can might just be you exposing what they want exposed. Hence, your place as oblivious controlled opposition.

Might you be willfully ignorant of that? I'm sure you would disagree.


"Controlled Opposition" means an oppositional element is actually working at the behest of the supposed thing it is against. As a subversive damage control and co-opt (of a genuine oppositional force).

Has always been my impression anyways.

Me? I'm just some bastard with about the lowest tolerance for things like deception, social engineering, identity politics, political parties, a counter-societal weaponized news media, the plundering of societies, war criminality, fascism, totalitarianism, police militarism, Big Brotherology, and so on.

Do with that what you will, but that's my agenda. No matter which "party" has been running everything into the ground at home while blowing up other peoples abroad, you'll find me in Opposition.



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 06:21 PM
link   
Guy is as trustworthy as herpes.



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 07:02 PM
link   
9 hrs later and it looks as though no one here has listened to any of the audio.

Is it:
1. Because there is little to no juicy stuff
Or
2. Aint nobody gotz time fo dat
???

Almost 60 flags...Id imgaine people are listening...

edit on 3404x6734America/ChicagovAmerica/Chicago2 by six67seven because: Did it



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 07:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
"Controlled Opposition" means an oppositional element is actually working at the behest of the supposed thing it is against. As a subversive damage control and co-opt (of a genuine oppositional force).

Has always been my impression anyways.

Sounds about right. "Hey look we are so awake because we question the MSM"


Me? I'm just some bastard with about the lowest tolerance for things like deception, social engineering, identity politics, political parties, a counter-societal weaponized news media, the plundering of societies, war criminality, fascism, totalitarianism, police militarism, Big Brotherology, and so on.

Sounds just like the guy to feed tidbits to so that he can push it out to the masses, grassroots style, in this CT trip everyone seems to be on.



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 07:36 PM
link   
Video title: "over 100 hours"

In the video: "over 200 hours" ... "we, we, we, we," etc.

"We don't have the time or the manpower to go over all the tapes".... Only 200 hours, though? How many people are running this operation? It has to be over one since he keeps saying we, so... 2... 3?

How is 200 hours of tapes a daunting task for any collective group?

My point being, he can't be nearly as professional as he's trying to appear to be if he can't put the manpower together to analyze 200 hours worth of tape. That's like a 2 day job for 10 people.

He has 10 grand to give to anybody who gives him anything, but can't pay or even get 10 people to volunteer to listen to 200 hours of tapes that he already has sectioned out. Very odd.
edit on 23-2-2017 by garbageface because: editing out edits



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 07:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: LSU0408
How can you come to a conclusion when there's still more information to be offered? Isn't a conclusion the end or finish of an event or process?

You can come to a conclusion about what was presented.

If you listen to 100 hours of that audio and there is nothing there you can certainly say so.

Even if the next segment has a bombshell it doesn't change the fact that the first 100 hours you listened to didn't have anything.

ETA: You can certainly say that dropping 100+ hours of audio without pointers to where the good stuff, if there is any, sucks. That would be conclusive.



Most of his critics myself included want unedited information to go along with his edited videos. Yet, he is doing counter to what he normally does in an attempt to silence critics. He is trying to overwhelm people with nothing so anything remotely questionable becomes big. He is pretty good at manipulating people.



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 08:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
in this CT trip everyone seems to be on.



I posted a small list of links a couple pages back. I cant wait for someone to come debunk any of those.


Thanks!



originally posted by: six67seven
9 hrs later and it looks as though no one here has listened to any of the audio.

Is it:
1. Because there is little to no juicy stuff
Or
2. Aint nobody gotz time fo dat
???

Almost 60 flags...Id imgaine people are listening...


The player was bogged out every time I tried to check it out. But like I said, a lot of people like myself wont even know who they're hearing to even begin to be able to make the best of any narratives in there. S there is that complication.
edit on 23-2-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 09:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
I posted a small list of links a couple pages back. I cant wait for someone to come debunk any of those.

Why tell me? That has nothing to do with what I stated. Actually the "validity" is what makes it so convincing to those of us who have been liberated from the matrix.



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 09:13 PM
link   



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 09:19 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Is that for me?

If so, Did you actually process what i posted?



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 11:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Well this seems a little underwhelming. Raw audio captured in 2009 by somebody who it doesn't appear was positioned very highly in the organization? The examples O'Keefe and cohorts came up with for the video aren't particularly interesting.

"I'm a little biased" OH NO!

"We don't use Rasmussen" SAY IT AIN'T SO! (I wouldn't either they're among the worst)

It's 119 hours of audio. Are we really supposed to believe that O'Keefe and his merry band of hoaxers don't have time to listen to 119 hours of audio? If there's 5 of them, they could have knocked it out in a work week doing 4 hours a piece a day.

Exposing the evil media wasn't worth 119 man hours? Lmao.


And nowhere in that whole post do I see a relevant counter-argument. Check The_Donald as the weaponized autists there will find the relevant audio you seek.



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 11:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: LSU0408
How can you come to a conclusion when there's still more information to be offered? Isn't a conclusion the end or finish of an event or process?

You can come to a conclusion about what was presented.

If you listen to 100 hours of that audio and there is nothing there you can certainly say so.

Even if the next segment has a bombshell it doesn't change the fact that the first 100 hours you listened to didn't have anything.

ETA: You can certainly say that dropping 100+ hours of audio without pointers to where the good stuff, if there is any, sucks. That would be conclusive.



Most of his critics myself included want unedited information to go along with his edited videos. Yet, he is doing counter to what he normally does in an attempt to silence critics. He is trying to overwhelm people with nothing so anything remotely questionable becomes big. He is pretty good at manipulating people.


In other words, he edited too much and didn't provide proper context and now it's just too much.



posted on Feb, 24 2017 @ 03:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: ErrorErrorError
Why are they offering 10$k award for content that exposes media malfeasance if they have damning evidence against one of evil MSM frontiers CNN ?


O'Keefe is a known bull#ter, latest promised to release video evidence showing Shillary throwing around racial slurs yet failed miserably. Why do you keep advertising a known bull#ter ?


CNN is also a known, proven bull#ter...why are they still on the air???



posted on Feb, 24 2017 @ 03:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: TobyFlenderson
a reply to: ErrorErrorError

Bull# is bull#, but audio recordings are direct evidence. The source doesn't matter when it's this concrete.

Unfortunately this is a partisan issue. It shouldn't be. When the press lies to us, just because we like the lie doesn't mean we should accept it. I fully expect the press on both sides to be biased. But to outright lie is despicable.

If you were a Hillary supporter, you should be pissed about this. Their fake polling lead to a miserable campaign by Hillary. She didn't even visit Wisconsin! She wouldn't do press conferences! The fact is proven that CNN juked the polls. What's scary is that other pollsters were reporting similar numbers. How coordinated was this effort?

PS- CNN are known bull#ers too.


Your post deserves to be shown again, and again. The ONLY people who would be pissed about this, the Wikileaks from the DNC, etc. are those that don't want the truth about the left exposed. Therefore...the enemy of the people. The people want and deserve...and demand...the truth! I don't care where facts lead, but I want them. Posts like this show the end result of suspicions while CNN and other liberal hacks show the suspicion and it never leads anywhere. I believe that is called FAKE NEWS.



posted on Feb, 24 2017 @ 04:34 PM
link   



new topics

top topics



 
74
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join