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.

 

DOJ Appoints Special Counsel In Russia Probe

page: 7
48
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:02 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope


One thing is for certain, if nothing is found to support the Russian narrative, there will be zero self-reflection or apology for the damage caused.


Completely unlike after the dozen plus Benghazi investigations that didn't prove any wrongdoing by Clinton for which the Republicans apologized profusely.
edit on 2017-5-17 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: kosmicjack

Only one thing to say - CNN.


Does that make it untrue?

Dismissing something simply because you do not like the source is intellectually lazy.


Given the way that CNN has been dishonest in their reportage of Trump stories in the extreme, then I am suspicious of how they are spinning this.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: LesMisanthrope


One thing is for certain, if nothing is found to support the Russian narrative, there will be zero self-reflection or apology for the damage caused.


Completely unlike those dozen plus Benghazi investigations that didn't prove any wrongdoing by Clinton that the Republicans apologized for profusely.


People are still spitting lies and bull# about Benghazi to this very day.

Something tells me they didn't get the memo that it was over.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:04 PM
link   
a reply to: kosmicjack

I said from what I'm hearing about this guy.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: kosmicjack

Only one thing to say - CNN.


Does that make it untrue?

Dismissing something simply because you do not like the source is intellectually lazy.


Given the way that CNN has been dishonest in their reportage of Trump stories in the extreme, then I am suspicious of how they are spinning this.


Being suspicious and skeptical is different than outright dismissing.

One is reasonable and would be the position I would take. Dismissing...is ignorant.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:06 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Then I take it you split your time between CNN and FOX, right? Right? And I'm positive you read a lot of Breitbart while you catch up on Huffington Post.

I should also add there is a world of difference between completely dismissing something and absolutely accepting it at face value.
edit on 17-5-2017 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:07 PM
link   
I'm glad they are doing this.
This was the only way to shut up the Dems on the Russian baloney.
I hope they get it over with quickly.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:09 PM
link   
The deflector shields are strong in this thread.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Speedtek
The deflector shields are strong in this thread.


On all sides.

Everyone has their own theory as to what is going on and will happen, and if you cannot accept that, then maybe you need to lower your deflector shields before you point at everyone else's and laugh.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance
First order of business - subpoena Seth Rich computer and DNC servers.


Bingo! An investigation into Seth Rich's laptop, what Comey knew about it and most importantly, who told the DC police to drop their investigation would drive the liberal power people's to turn their Russian propaganda up so high they would commit multiple crimes to get something/anything to stick.

At this point, the blood is in the air, facts that we tin foil conspiracy theorists knew months, if not a year ago, would finally come out and once in for all end this Russian bull#.

I say let it all out and let the chips fall where they may.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:11 PM
link   
a reply to: kosmicjack

If there was no wrong doing in the memo then explain its validity in a court room.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:12 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

and I am just saying it should be taken into account when considering their reporting.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Speedtek
The deflector shields are strong in this thread.


On all sides.

Everyone has their own theory as to what is going on and will happen, and if you cannot accept that, then maybe you need to lower your deflector shields before you point at everyone else's and laugh.


I do not think I mentioned "a side" - no need to feel paranoid



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Xcathdra

Better dig in. From what I'm hearing g it's going to be a long investigation with no press briefings or testimony until he's done. Could be a year .


I dont think it will be that long. He has assumed leadership over the FBI* agents assigned to the investigation, he is a former FBI Director so he understands the ins and outs of the Department, he is a former Marine, so getting him up to speed should not take as long as other special counsels.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: LesMisanthrope


One thing is for certain, if nothing is found to support the Russian narrative, there will be zero self-reflection or apology for the damage caused.


Completely unlike after the dozen plus Benghazi investigations that didn't prove any wrongdoing by Clinton for which the Republicans apologized profusely.


Not quite correct. A federal judge just ordered the release of several emails between obama, clinton and several middle east leaders about the benghazi issue that the obama administration tried to classify. The judge read them and said they dont qualify and ordered their release.

Those issues are still ongoing.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: introvert

Then I take it you split your time between CNN and FOX, right? Right? And I'm positive you read a lot of Breitbart while you catch up on Huffington Post.


I read quite a bit, from all of those sites...plus some.



I should also add there is a world of difference between completely dismissing something and absolutely accepting it at face value.


Not really. Both are intellectually lazy. You have to put a bit of work in to properly informing yourself.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: introvert

and I am just saying it should be taken into account when considering their reporting.


Be skeptical are you like, but we should not dismiss what the report simply because of political partisanship.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Rosinitiate

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance
First order of business - subpoena Seth Rich computer and DNC servers.


Bingo! An investigation into Seth Rich's laptop, what Comey knew about it and most importantly, who told the DC police to drop their investigation would drive the liberal power people's to turn their Russian propaganda up so high they would commit multiple crimes to get something/anything to stick.

At this point, the blood is in the air, facts that we tin foil conspiracy theorists knew months, if not a year ago, would finally come out and once in for all end this Russian bull#.

I say let it all out and let the chips fall where they may.


I am still trying to figure out why the FBI were even involved in a local murder. they dont have jurisdiction and dont have the authority under existing law to take over that type of investigation.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance
First order of business - subpoena Seth Rich computer and DNC servers.


Hehe, you think that still exists?

Perhaps time to drudge the Potomac!




posted on May, 17 2017 @ 07:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: introvert

and I am just saying it should be taken into account when considering their reporting.


Be skeptical are you like, but we should not dismiss what the report simply because of political partisanship.


But it is ok to report only one side based on partisan politics? CNN has, 98% of the time, attacked Trump, using 94 anti trump guests to 7 who support... and I should be open minded on their reporting?

Fair enough... I take their reporting habits into account when evaluating their reporting.



new topics

top topics



 
48
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join