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.
originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: Kali74
He also said the CEO ordered them to get off another major story and go back to the Russia narrative. The entire video wasn't all opinion, don't misrepresent it.
originally posted by: Kettu
Let's see...
Trump gives project veritas $10,000 a while back...
The outfit is known for manipulating people into getting them to say things and deceptively editing videos to push a false narrative and agenda...
And what do we have here? A highly edited video with lots of cuts/edits without any proper context.
Man that desperation is strong. You all want to so badly believe this is just going to go away.
originally posted by: underwerks
originally posted by: knowledgehunter0986
a reply to: underwerks
What you fail to understand is that if this had NOT come out, the narrative would still be the same - no collusion. We didn't NEED this as proof. Sure it helped a tonne, but vindication isn't necessary.
I just find it funny that in the face of something as damning as this, you find any and every way to still somehow deflect, no matter how illogical your argument has been, which is has been throughout this thread.
Not once did you say, "hey maybe this Russian thing might possibly be baloney", but instead you deflected to every corner of the globe because it would hurt your little heart too much to even entertain that idea.
You even deflected to a place I didn't think was possible
Maybe the Russia investigations are a cover for what they're really investigating?
Really?
This isn't proof there isn't any Russian collusion. This is a TV news producers opinion that there isn't.
Understand the difference?
You've already said multiple times you don't need any proof to believe this, and that speaks for itself. You shouldn't criticize someone who wants more evidence than a TV producers opinion. Not all of us believe in things because they confirm ideas we already have.
originally posted by: Kali74
O'Keefe is a hoaxster.
A little thread I did on him some years ago.
FWIW
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: Kali74
O'Keefe is a hoaxster.
A little thread I did on him some years ago.
FWIW
How is that proof of anything? You can't change what was said or who said it.
In the age of forgotten investigative journalism, O'keefe has been doing it right.
Yet, they depend on anonymous sources with no face, audio or video.
originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Wardaddy454
O'Keefe edits things to fit a narrative. It might make you feel cozy but it's deceptive.
originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: face23785
It's a health editor's personal opinion. I don't get what the big deal is.