Devin Nunes worked with Trump administration to create a fake scandal about Susan Rice

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: angeldoll
FINE! Nobody wants to chat with me I'll just take my little red wagon and go home!

Your assignment was to study all those Obama court cases !!

Not go off on wild tangents and rants.

Not go off on wild tangents and rants. Wild tangents and rants. I like it. I think you might have just stumbled onto my new M.O. !

a reply to: Corytrevor

Did you miss the post eight years where the Right (our current President included) tried to delegitimize Obama? And you're going to complain about four months? ATS isn't an echo chamber. You may want to get used to that fact. Otherwise you may be better off over at /r/The_Donald where they ban anyone with a differing opinion.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Or, stop paying attention to politics, which I personally would love to do.

Wouldn't that be wonderful??? Unfortunately, the political critters will still be paying attention and if we're not then we're really screwed. Of all the people they want me to be scared of, they scare me most of all.

(big looooooong shudder here)

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: Gryphon66

Or, stop paying attention to politics, which I personally would love to do.

Wouldn't that be wonderful??? Unfortunately, the political critters will still be paying attention and if we're not then we're really screwed. Of all the people they want me to be scared of, they scare me most of all.

(big looooooong shudder here)

It amazes me how many on here immediately disregard any story with unnamed sources. Then again, if there's one group that knows how damaging unnamed sources can be to a presidency it's the Republicans.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
It amazes me how many on here immediately disregard any story with unnamed sources. Then again, if there's one group that knows how damaging unnamed sources can be to a presidency it's the Republicans.

Many don't have the same issues if the material is what could be termed favorable to "right-wing" issues ...

Odd that.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
It amazes me how many on here immediately disregard any story with unnamed sources. Then again, if there's one group that knows how damaging unnamed sources can be to a presidency it's the Republicans.

Perhaps that's true for some... but for some of us, we're not disregarding it, we're simply taking it for exactly what it's worth at this point: an unsubstantiated and unsourced claim that may or may not be true; and even if true, represents only a small part of the big picture.

There is a good reason why the accused have a right to face their accusers, and why the burden of proof is on the accuser, and why folks aren't convicted and condemned by unnamed accusers with no proof.

But, of course, you knew that already, right?

originally posted by: angeldoll

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: angeldoll
FINE! Nobody wants to chat with me I'll just take my little red wagon and go home!

Your assignment was to study all those Obama court cases !!

Not go off on wild tangents and rants.

Not go off on wild tangents and rants. Wild tangents and rants. I like it. I think you might have just stumbled onto my new M.O. !

Nothing new...

You are probably the most uninformed poster on the site.

You live in a dream world.

Whoever tells you who to vote for is even dimmer than you.

Now, go check the mailbox...

a reply to: Gryphon66

Of course ats is for everyone that's why I never told anyone to do anything. I was just suggesting that there is a better forum to continuously bash trump but thanks for the input

originally posted by: whyamIhere

originally posted by: angeldoll

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: angeldoll
FINE! Nobody wants to chat with me I'll just take my little red wagon and go home!

Your assignment was to study all those Obama court cases !!

Not go off on wild tangents and rants.

Not go off on wild tangents and rants. Wild tangents and rants. I like it. I think you might have just stumbled onto my new M.O. !

Nothing new...

You are probably the most uninformed poster on the site.

You live in a dream world.

Whoever tells you who to vote for is even dimmer than you.

Now, go check the mailbox...

You really really don't have anything significant to say do you? Nothing of substance whatsoever. Only little sophomoric cheap shots. I won't respond to your comments again, okay? So take your best shots. To be honest, some comments are simply to ignorant to yield a response from me these days. Beneath me, so to speak. You have a great day.

The next time you want to troll me? Remember this.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: Corytrevor
a reply to: Gryphon66

Of course ats is for everyone that's why I never told anyone to do anything. I was just suggesting that there is a better forum to continuously bash trump but thanks for the input

Oh, you're most welcome.

I wouldn't worry about Trump-bashing too much. Obama was bashed for eight years and he's spending his days on yachts and tropical islands now.

It all works out in the end.

a reply to: Boadicea

I have nothing wrong being skeptical over an unnamed source. My issue is with the people coming on and shouting fake news every time they see that an unnamed source was used.

While the sources themselves may be mistaken the odds of all of these unnamed sources being fictitious are astronomical. It doesn't matter the bias of a media outlet, if an editor find out one of their writers is fabricating sources that writer will be out on their ass immediately. Because if it comes out that writer was using fake sources and they're still on the payroll that hurts the reputation of the outlet as a whole.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Oh forgot to mention, not a die hard trump supporter but I don't hate the guy. Anyways the issue for me is that I like to read ats for the huge variety of threads. Although lately it just seems politics are over taking the forum.

My bad don't post much, should've included this in my original response to you

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Not for nothing, NBC News itself is usually fairly conservative with reporting and sources.

Conservative in the sense that, if there's not a real source, they won't broadcast/publish it.

originally posted by: Corytrevor
a reply to: Gryphon66

Oh forgot to mention, not a die hard trump supporter but I don't hate the guy. Anyways the issue for me is that I like to read ats for the huge variety of threads. Although lately it just seems politics are over taking the forum.

My bad don't post much, should've included this in my original response to you

No worries Cory! Politics brings in the clicks. LOL.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Haha yes it does. Now that I'm looking over my original post, was rude of me to to suggest that.
My bad people of ats!

a reply to: Gryphon66

A bit of division as well but anyways good talking to you gryphon, have a good one m8

a reply to: defiythelie

An article from Salon with an anonymous intelligence source. I'll sit back and wait for the investigation to be completed. Have they called anyone to testify yet? Interesting that since the Rice revelation we don't hear much about the Russians colluding with the Trump administration. Silence. Crickets....

originally posted by: Mike.Ockizard
a reply to: defiythelie

An article from Salon with an anonymous intelligence source. I'll sit back and wait for the investigation to be completed. Have they called anyone to testify yet? Interesting that since the Rice revelation we don't hear much about the Russians colluding with the Trump administration. Silence. Crickets....

The House of Representatives announced yesterday they are still working on their list of witnesses, and will remain reticent, as the Senate and FBI are also doing. So don't get your hopes up about "crickets". It's anything BUT.

a reply to: Gryphon66

You said the source is "loose" because it is against Trump. That is no where near what you normally say.

Any other thread critical of any DNC operative with unknown sources you demand proof to the point of nearly trolling.

Disingenuous, yes