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.

 

"highly anticipated" Wikileaks dump, Assange, Hillary in Oz, Rohrabacher : connecting dots?

page: 2
32
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:
+10 more 
posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 07:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke
Thanks. I'm not letting that crap invade my brain.
we know, but it won't stop you from explaining to us what it really says though will it?



+1 more 
posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 07:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Maybe you think it's fiction because you weren't paying attention in 2013 when the story aired on NBC, or perhaps because you can't pull up the print version from NBC today for whatever reason- you decide why.

Fortunately, google cache still shows us what was there:

Link.



New allegations rocking the State Department involve alleged incidents during Hillary Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State.

NBC News has obtained documents tied to ongoing investigations at the State Department involving eight cases of alleged misconduct by state department workers, contractors, and a United States ambassador. The incidents reportedly occurred during Hillary Clinton’s tenure, according to the documents.

An internal Inspector General memo from last October reported the ambassador under investigation “routinely ditched his protective security detail in order to solicit sexual favors from both prostitutes and minor children.” The report also states that a high-ranking official at the State Department directed investigators to “cease the investigation.”

The ambassador, whom NBC News has chosen not to identify, denied all allegations.

While refusing to comment on the specific investigations, a state department spokesperson said “the notion that we would not vigorously pursue criminal misconduct in a case, in any case, is preposterous.”





edit on 17-10-2017 by loam because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 07:28 AM
link   
a reply to: loam

Thanks for digging that up. I love at the end when the state department rep says that "the notion that they wouldn't prosecute such an offence is Preposterous ."

Any one who uses that word is obviously lying.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 07:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Woodcarver

In the context of how NBC refused to first run the Harvey Weinstein story, this gem from the article takes on new meaning too:



The ambassador, whom NBC News has chosen not to identify, denied all allegations.



edit on 17-10-2017 by loam because: (no reason given)


+4 more 
posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 07:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Your "not letting that crap invade my brain" comment reminds me of Jimmy Kimmel saying he's not interested in those who don't share his views.

That echo chamber is getting smaller and smaller.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 08:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Hmmm. Maybe you should stop watching NBC news. It is a deep state controlled media outlet. Much like CNN, ABC, CBS, NPR and the whole Gannett newspaper empire which is made up of nearly ALL of the major newspapers. Wake up. Chicken little was a fairy tale used to program you to "keep that crap out of your head"



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 08:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: abago71

I watch nbc news.....It's fiction.


Indeed, this is obvious - awkward and uncomfortable information is hard to swallow, especially when the source is seemingly unpalatable. But, I guess you'll never know because you don't read things if you don't like the info delivery-system - that's a shame, but not at all unexpected.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 08:38 AM
link   
a reply to: pravdaseeker

Assange is like Lucy, and his acolytes Charlie Brown.




posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 09:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Woodcarver

How can I know more than what's in the OP? I'm not Kreskin
en.m.wikipedia.org...

Duh....



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 09:10 AM
link   
a reply to: loam

How does this relate? What does this have to do with wiki and Russia again????

Oh it doesn't. It's another distraction.

Assange doesn't have squat on Clinton. It's just a right wing wish that will never be granted.

Face it.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 09:15 AM
link   
a reply to: loam

They didn't refuse to run it. They told Ronan to flesh it out because Weinstein was a big fish. When he did he gave the story over to the Times. That's all. They never refused to run it. But that's a convenient narrative even if it's a lie right? It fits your belief system and that's all that matters.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 09:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Mike.Ockizard

Hmm maybe you should stop using wingnut catch phrases like Deep state and think for yourself.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 09:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: loam

How does this relate? What does this have to do with wiki and Russia again????

Oh it doesn't. It's another distraction.

Assange doesn't have squat on Clinton. It's just a right wing wish that will never be granted.

Face it.



Welcome to todays episode of Fantasy Island.....Ze Plane...Ze Plane.
As opposed to your Left Wing fantasy that Russian bogeymen are controlling Trump remotely?



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 09:41 AM
link   
No point in try to talk to someone who has been a member for 619 days and has 19,369 posts..

That's an average of 31 posts a day.

It needs to get a life, or it gets paid per post.


How would it know that Assange has nothing on Hillary?

It doesn't.

No one knows what Assange is going to leak, or if he is going to leak anything. It's all speculation at this point.
edit on R452017-10-17T09:45:58-05:00k4510Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 09:58 AM
link   
How come wikileaks never leaks anything about Russia?

Oh wait...they do.

https://__._/spyfiles/russia/

fill in the blanks with the name of the website. ATS won't allow links to the site I guess.
edit on R592017-10-17T09:59:50-05:00k5910Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 09:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Woodcarver

How can I know more than what's in the OP? I'm not Kreskin
en.m.wikipedia.org...

Duh....
Why do you pretend like we don't know your posting history? By default, we already know what you are going to say when we see your name above a post. We know that you won't watch vids that don't agree with your set in stone opinions. And you will ignore anything that does not come from far left media. We know, we already know. I hope you are getting paid per post, otherwise you are wasting your time, plugging cannonball sized holes in your ship with your thumbs.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 10:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

31 posts a day? This is your job huh? Nobody would invest so much time into their own ignorance for free.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 10:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: loam

They didn't refuse to run it. They told Ronan to flesh it out because Weinstein was a big fish. When he did he gave the story over to the Times. That's all. They never refused to run it. But that's a convenient narrative even if it's a lie right? It fits your belief system and that's all that matters.


You're the only person in the universe that believes that.

Compare to all of the ant-Trump material NBC ran with UNNAMED sources. But in this example, police video and three ON-CAMERA accusers wasn't enough to meet NBC standards???

They spiked the story.

NBC News President Noah Oppenheim, who happens to be a screenwriter pushing several project over the years, I'm sure had nothing to do with that.


edit on 17-10-2017 by loam because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 10:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

You funny!

Clinton, Podesta, Uranium One, Obama and crew are pretty much ALL under investigations now. Russia has always been investigated.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: FamCore
a reply to: pravdaseeker

Elites protect each other and each others' depravity, it goes without saying. I doubt anything will come of this... if it does, it will be the small fish that get caught in the net while those who should really be held accountable slip through


NO!?!?

As long as they arent convicted in court then they did nothing wrong and should be re-elected for life and given $60,000,000 book deals every other year.

What's a matter with you?










new topics

top topics



 
32
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join