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.

 

Mike Flynn Turns on Trump, Talks To FBI

page: 1
24
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:
+6 more 
posted on May, 24 2017 @ 07:53 PM
link   
Fantastic article from May 22nd form the likes of maniac website Patribotics (Exposing Vladimir Putin's War on America).

Loaded with real great sources.

See the highlights and figure out how they spread wild propaganda !!

Put this Site on your radar scope for future BS related dreck.

First 3 paragraphs with multiple "sources" italicized.

Mike Flynn Turns on Trump, Talks To FBI

Multiple sources with links to the intelligence and law enforcement communities say that Lt. Gen Mike Flynn has turned on Donald Trump, and has already had at least one lengthy interview with the FBI.

General Flynn has not been offered a deal as of yet, these sources say. They indicate that as of this writing Flynn has not been arrested. He would likely be offered a chance to surrender himself, sources report, when that time comes.

Sources with links to the Justice Department indicate that General Flynn has already been indicted. On Twitter, Claude Taylor exclusively reported on May 14th that an indictment against Flynn had been returned by a Grand Jury and that this indictment was sealed. I can further report that Flynn’s indictment is thought to be for his failure to register under FARA, the Foreign Agents’ Registration Act, for his lobbying for Turkey. Reporting by NBC of Grand Jury subpoenas in an investigation for which Flynn is the subject, sources say, cover separate offenses of Mike Flynn’s that are linked to Russia. These are being investigated under prosecutors at the Northern District of Virginia, with an attorney accustomed to handling espionage prosecutions.




edit on May-24-2017 by xuenchen because: sortedbysources




posted on May, 24 2017 @ 08:04 PM
link   
How dare you question those outstanding journalists?
😂


+4 more 
posted on May, 24 2017 @ 08:06 PM
link   
Is this you throwing out the "fake news" card for the 10 thousandth time?

First you were complaining about the media using the "fake news" card all the time just a few months ago, now you are the one who uses it all the time.

Ironic isn't it?
edit on 5/24/2017 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)


+3 more 
posted on May, 24 2017 @ 08:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Is this you throwing out the "fake news" card for the 10 thousandth time?

First you were complaining about the media using the "fake news" card all the time just a few months ago, now you are the one who uses it all the time.

Ironic isn't it?


LOL nothing else to whine about ?




posted on May, 24 2017 @ 08:13 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Props on the colorfulness of the op.



posted on May, 24 2017 @ 08:14 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

I couldn't possibly compete with the likes of you when it comes to whining but I do try to keep up the best I can.



posted on May, 24 2017 @ 08:28 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen


Multiple sources with links to the intelligence and law enforcement communities say...

Except there are no sources or links, period.


...these sources say.

What sources beside the MSM, again?


He would likely be offered a chance to surrender himself, sources report, when that time comes.

What 'reports'? O, the main scream spin...


Sources with links to the Justice Department indicate...

Is that indication by word of mouth alone?


Sources say

Thanks for colorful highlights of the no evidence 'evidence'. All those colors makes it so more not truthful.



posted on May, 24 2017 @ 08:35 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen



Until I realized this was commentary about 'sources'. I wasn't sure how / if to respond.

Well done. Well done indeed.

Psssst. intrptr And I'd argue the colorful sources make it more interesting. I am sure the colors mean something right?



edit on 5 24 17 by KaDeCo because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2017 @ 08:37 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1


Replies* like this are why I hate to like this site.
edit on 24-5-2017 by Antipathy17 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2017 @ 08:41 PM
link   
Well, with that many sources I reckon that it's done deal. May as well ask the same sources what President Pence will wear to his inauguration.



posted on May, 24 2017 @ 08:54 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Ha, Mensch and Taylor. I think someone does feed them intel, uses them as pawns. Gives them a good lead once in a while.
Even a blind pig finds a truffle now and then.

Maybe they should tell us about the 35 million Podesta pocketed in Kremlin money.

Does anyone know of a truly independant unbiased media outlet? Does one exist?
edit on 24-5-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2017 @ 08:59 PM
link   
Funny.

If it's a conservative blog or website that fits with the OP's narrative while offering little of substance except to reaffirm that narrative, it's gospel, but if it's another blog or website that doesn't fit with the narrative, it's automatically suspect and fake.

It's so pathetic it's funny, and predictable.

Carry on.



posted on May, 24 2017 @ 09:24 PM
link   
Just so you know O.P., anonymous sources are a cornerstone of a Democracy and a free press. They do not mean that the facts are wrong. A journalist will more than likely confirm the source is who they say they are.

I challenge you to convince me that anonymous sources have a track record of being wrong. From all the news I read, I come across with the impression that they are remaining anonymous so they can keep their jobs and are safe from repercussions from Trump. An anonymous source, "Deep Throat," was a cornerstone in unraveling Watergate.

If the main defense you have against an article is "Oh gosh! There are anonymous sources!" then I'm sorry, but you are going to lose the argument.

As far as this article goes, it is possible it is not credible, I admit. I get that from the website, which appears like it could be one of those tabloids that make its money off of fake news. This is when you must do more research and look for more articles (that aren't copying one another).
edit on 24pmWed, 24 May 2017 21:31:37 -0500kbpmkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)

edit on 24pmWed, 24 May 2017 21:32:45 -0500kbpmkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2017 @ 09:29 PM
link   
a reply to: darkbake

CNN ran a story the other day using 'someone who thinks like Comey' as a source.

The MSM outlets have been compromised.

Think Operation Mockingbird.....



posted on May, 24 2017 @ 09:39 PM
link   
a reply to: darkbake

I understand your confusion.




posted on May, 24 2017 @ 09:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

Ironically, Louise Mensch is a conservative former British MP and she was the chief editor of the News Corp website, Heat Street, until a few months ago. Rupert Murdoch's News Corp of course is also the parent company of the Fox empire.

She scooped everyone on the FISA warrants (based on her unnamed sources) story. Which was admittedly, a pretty impressive scoop as she was out in front of that one by weeks, maybe two months.

Since then however, she's been really going full tilt into pure CT. She hasn't quite become the anti-Trump version of Alex Jones but this blog of hers is pretty out there.

It is pretty absurd that Xeunchen or any Trump supporter would be mocking Mensch considering their own tastes in outlets.

Remember all these gems? All of them "exclusives" based on "unnamed sources" — all of them YUGELY popular with Trump supporters:

BREAKING: Comey Mandates All FBI Agents Report to D.C. Offices; Prep for Raids, Possible Arrests in Clinton Probes (thread for this got 134 flags)

BREAKING BOMBSHELL: NYPD Blows Whistle on New Hillary Emails: Money Laundering, Sex Crimes with Children, Child Exploitation, Pay to Play, Perjury (thread for this got 104 flags)

Und er Intense Pressure to Silence Wikileaks, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Proposed Drone Strike on Julian Assange (thread for this got 78 flags)

That one made it all the way to COP congressmen and if I'm not mistaken, that was fake news that Trump himself repeated.
NYPD: Hillary Clinton Was Wearing “Invisible” Earpiece To Receive Stealth Coaching During Live NBC TV Town Hall (thread for this one got 82 flags)

Those were all completely fabricated. All of the threads citing them made it to the top of the front page and none of them were LOL'd/hoax binned. Find the threads and you'll see some of the very same hypocrites talking smack about how all Trump critics are "fake news," eagerly believing that garbage.

Here's one other bit of irony that's very appropriate for this thread. Flynn has had a thing for posting fake news citing unnamed sources. The one that got him the most ridicule before leaks revealed his lying and forced Trump to finally deal with him (by letting him resign) was actually the "BREAKING BOMBSHELL: NYPD Blows Whistle on New Hillary Emails" story from above.

He also tweeted a beauty from Breitbart that cited unnamed sources... of Erik Prince.

So yeah, these aren't the folks that should mocking anyone's journalism or lack thereof.



posted on May, 24 2017 @ 09:54 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Why didn't CNN pick up on this? This kind of rumor is right up that terrorist tabloid's alley.



posted on May, 24 2017 @ 09:58 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen
Is this the same bunch of "journalists" that reported a sealed indictment of Trump last week? Same grand jury? That must have been some good times in the grand jury room! Thanks for the chuckles!


Let's just hope that the screamers are all holding their breath until these indictments are released.
Just a day or two of silence would be most grand. They seem to be attempting to peg out the Screamometer lately. It's enough to make a person pray for an EMP to allow us to pay attention to our immediate community.



posted on May, 24 2017 @ 10:03 PM
link   
somebody is winning in a major way, that's for sure.
we no longer attack each other over who said what...
now we attack each over whether anybody actually said anything.
we're spending more time verifying and providing solid sources than the journalists who are supposed to be doing that in the first place.
story? what story? prove that there's a story.
they might have finally got us over a stump



posted on May, 25 2017 @ 03:27 AM
link   
a reply to: PolyCottonBlend

I have to agree. I've noticed the political debates are becoming a little less polarised here recently. I think we're all sick of unconfirmed 'news', on both sides of the aisle.




top topics



 
24
<<   2 >>

log in

join