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.

 

Project Veritas: American Pravda: CNN Part 2

page: 14
65
<< 11  12  13   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 29 2017 @ 12:16 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert

LOL - that's a lot of words - you could have saved a lot of effort by typing "I'm wrong and off topic - sorry"

Never mind, apology accepted - next time, get your sh!t together.





posted on Jun, 29 2017 @ 01:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: FamCore
a reply to: IAMTAT

So earlier in the year and up until about a month ago, anyone who was Anti-Trump and wanted to berate Trump Supporters would make fun of them and talk about "Must be more Fake News, huh?"

Now we find out CNN is in the hot seat because, in fact they are responsible for Fake News. Or as the Trump haters like to say were caught spreading "Alt-Facts".

Anyone who has supported Trump all this time and has been frustrated by constant flurry of attacks would likely want to throw this in everyones faces now. I plead with you folks, be the bigger people.

This back and forth cycle will keep perpetuating unless we can grow/evolve and stop attacking the other side of the fence. CNN put out Fake News, we know this now. Can we try to be more cooperative and have productive conversations instead of just attacking lefties and righties? Just my side note...




Thank you for saying this. I totally agree with you and I'm certain many others do too.



posted on Jun, 29 2017 @ 01:32 AM
link   
So where was the outrage when Van Jones said he didnt think there was anything to the Russian investigation on Twitter June 23?

twitter.com...

Was it not edited properly? Was it not some hidden camera investigation candid moment?


He has been public with his feelings before project veritas came around.



posted on Jun, 29 2017 @ 02:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler


Ok Foval admitted to paying mentally ill people to incite violence. Thats much better.


I'm not going to defend Scott Foval anymore than I would Alex Jones. Neither one of them invented the concept of paying agitators though and don't think they're the only ones. What I was pointing out was how things are presented to promote conflation which leads to things like one prolific ATS poster referring incessantly to "the Paid Riot Squads."


Alex Jones sucks, paying people to incite violence is bad. Are you implying I cite Alex Jones a lot or something?


Nope. Just pointing out the disparity in the popular reaction to each.


Comey said the NYT story was flat out wrong AND he said that mostly the anonymous sourced stories get it wrong. Perhaps you missed when he said that.


This I believe is the relevant bit? (transcript):


RISCH: OK. So — so, again, so the American people can understand this, that report by the New York Times was not true. Is that a fair statement?

COMEY: In — in the main, it was not true. And, again, all of you know this, maybe the American people don’t. The challenge — and I’m not picking on reporters about writing stories about classified information, is that people talking about it often don’t really know what’s going on.

And those of us who actually know what’s going on are not talking about it. And we don’t call the press to say, hey, you got that thing wrong about this sensitive topic. We just have to leave it there.


I see what you're saying but I don't believe that adequately substantiates "many of them were flat out lies" — and that's setting aside the fact that "lie" implies deliberate deception.


And you say most of their stories are confirmed. Really, the ones with anonymous stories about Russia? Show me the confirmed ones.


I linked to a few of them already:

* Carter Page meeting with Russian spies in 2013.

* Coates and Rogers testimony (confirmed no less by Trey Gowdy)

* The one thread has a link to an article with an anonymous source for both the rejected and granted FISA warrants for Carter Page.

How about some bigger ones?

* Michael Flynn's communication with Kislyak?

* Devin Nunes flitting off from an Uber to go to a clandestine meeting at the WH to be spoonfed the "unmasking" narrative.

* The existence and content of Comey's memos. Confirmed by Comey.

* Manafort blackmail attempt & daughter's hacked/leaked text messages. Confirmed by Manafort.

* Kushner's meeting with VEB banker Sergei Gorkov. Confirmed by VEB.

* That NSA document that got the young stupid contractor chick arrested. (leaked to The Intercept)

* Carter Page questioned by FBI (reported by WaPo, confirmed by Carter Page himself)

That's 10 off the top of my head.


By the same token then, most of the things Trumps says arent lies, so why are you on him all of the time?


Trump and his spokespeople are less credible than CNN by any measure and by quite a lot.


The problem is they have an agenda. and they have spread false stories to enact that agenda. You have spread those stories yourself.

Its not just the threads you make, its your comments on others too.

But for example, look at your thread about Trump server.

There is no proof for this whatsoever. The Intercept of all places debunked it.


Thanks for the link. Well not to DC but through them, to The Intercept. I don't know that you picked a very good example and if that's the worst of my offenses, then I'd say I'm not doing too poorly at all. It does sound like Salon's source ("tea leaves") was leaving some things out. Still, a "flat out lie?" Sloppy? One-sided? Heavily biased? Very speculative? Sure but Paul Vixie (who is a foremost authority in his field) saw the same material and disagreed with Mandiant's conclusions.

So to say there "is no proof" isn't exactly correct either. There's evidence but it's open to interpretation and The Intercept made a good case for their interpretation.


Yet you were duped by slate and others like CNN that kept pushing this quoting anonymous sources.


So you keep saying! Do you remember this?

Obama used Britain's inteligence agencies to listen in on Trump


This is troubling enough. But now it gets even worse. Obama and his people have all been appalled by the suggestion that they would wiretap Trump. But now intelligence sources are saying that Obama did not order the wiretaps, he instead asked Britain's intelligence services to use the NSA database to provide Obamas people with transcripts of Trump or his teams conversations with Russians.


You want to talk about a narrative and getting duped and Donald Trump lies? Donald Trump tweets that OBAMA "wiretapped" HIM at Trump Tower. He tweets a baseless allegation and the White House, a Flynn protege, Devin Nunes and the right-wing media machine (most recently JW) band together to try to figure out how to cause just enough uncertainty that if you get hammered, cock your head just right and squint, it almost seems plausible.

Except no. As you know by now I'm sure, the British strongly dismissed that anonymously sourced allegation that Fox duped you into pushing. Yet just the other day I saw a thread accusing Obama of spying on his political opponents when there's absolutely no proof of that except wishful thinking. Even Nunes said of the unmasking narrative he was delivering like a good lapdog, that it was incidental collection, appeared completely legal and in no way substantiated Trump's massively significant lie.

Only Trump can get away with lies like that because his base simply doesn't care so no matter what he does, there's a group — not a majority mind you — who will defend/dismiss anything he does.

Can you even imagine a previous president casually tweeting an entirely unsupported allegation of that magnitude?


But again, its up to you. If you are ok with producers and correspondents at CNN saying the Russia thing is garbage and their CEO is forcing the to talk about it, and stories being confirmed as lies thats your prerogative.

Many of us do have a huge problem with this.


Yeah I'm not that impressed with these two videos honestly. When you say "the Russia thing is garbage" what do you mean precisely? That there was no Russian meddling in the election?
edit on 2017-6-29 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2017 @ 03:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Pyle

Thanks for the link. That really puts the whole thing in proper context and should pretty much close this thread. All anyone has to do is watch Van Jones's own statement in the video on Twitter from a week ago. Here's my quick transcript (excuse any errors it's late):


I am glad that there is a Russia investigation and I hope they get to the bottom of it. I think Democrats are fooling ourselves if we think that something is going to come out of this investigation and end the Trump presidency and make everything better. Unless there's a real smoking gun — which there's probably not — it's just gonna be a big 'ol mess. Meanwhile, we're not talking about jobs, not talking about poverty, not talking about solutions, not talking about the addiction crisis. Let's talk about our stuff.


Sheds a lot of light on what Van Jones was actually saying and it's not at all what it's been made out by O'Keefe and cohorts nor is it a secret.

Mark this one down as a fail for the serial hoaxer. And this is what the WH and the President are telling Americans to watch.

And while we're at it, let's not forget this:

Trump used his foundation to fund guerrilla filmmaker James O’Keefe


Trump neglected, however, to mention his own connection to the videos, released by James O’Keefe and his Project Veritas tax-exempt group. According to a list of charitable donations made by Trump‘s controversial foundation (provided to the Washington Post in April by Trump’s campaign), on May 13, 2015, it gave $10,000 to Project Veritas.


Who is paying O'Keefe now? Breitbart News? Robert Mercer? This thread shoule be retitled, Project Veritas: Trump Pravda.

and with that, good night.




posted on Jun, 29 2017 @ 07:50 AM
link   
Great compilation showing the true face of FNN.

edit on 29-6-2017 by Konduit because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2017 @ 09:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: introvert

LOL - that's a lot of words - you could have saved a lot of effort by typing "I'm wrong and off topic - sorry"

Never mind, apology accepted - next time, get your sh!t together.



I've held my own just fine.

I'm not the one saying "I'm right cuz twitter and Youtube".


Kids these days.



posted on Jun, 29 2017 @ 09:30 AM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT

The Russia thing is a big juicy whopper with all the trimmings and special sauce.



Do you want fries with that?
edit on 6292017 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2017 @ 09:40 AM
link   
a reply to: FamCore

The only ones shouting fake news is the right.
On the left the cry has been liar liar pants on fire.
The news isn't fake but every word out of trumps mouth is a lie.
He's nothing but a big fat liar.



posted on Jun, 29 2017 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

oh so, i guess following CNN's integrity, it seems like you've picked up on their spirit of making claims based on thin air.

the truth: "yes, it is."

you: "no, it isn't."



posted on Jun, 29 2017 @ 05:55 PM
link   

“If you take any one line of my argument out of context, you can use it to pull off a hoax. That’s what O’Keefe’s minions did,” Jones wrote in the CNN article.

“The notion that I think Trump is innocent of all wrongdoing in Russiagate is ludicrous. But perhaps the people on team Trump can afford to live in a fantasy world," he continued.

“Did I mean that there is ‘nothing’ to the allegations that members of team Trump colluded with the Russians and then tried to cover it up by firing FBI Director James Comey? No - and far from it,” he wrote.

“In other words, no evidence is going to emerge (‘THIS WEEK,’ soon, or maybe ever) that is powerful enough to force the craven GOP to oust Trump," he added.


The Hill



posted on Jun, 29 2017 @ 08:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

his response is *way worse* than i thought it was going to be.

..............what's the hoax?

nowhere in that link you provided does he actually clarify what he initially stated. he never clarifies what his nothing burger comment is in reference to. he just labeled the entire exchange as "a hoax pulled from a one liner."

this is amazing - he's now doubling down, taking you all here who posited that "he never thought trump was definitely colluding" on a rollercoaster ride, and stating that he really does believe trump and his cabinet are guilty of collusion.



“Did I mean that there is ‘nothing’ to the allegations that members of team Trump colluded with the Russians and then tried to cover it up by firing FBI Director James Comey? No - and far from it,” he wrote.

“In other words, no evidence is going to emerge (‘THIS WEEK,’ soon, or maybe ever) that is powerful enough to force the craven GOP to oust Trump," he added.

Jones also wrote that he thinks "there probably was collusion” between the Trump campaign and the Russians.


.....


edit on 29-6-2017 by facedye because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
65
<< 11  12  13   >>

log in

join