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.

 

The contradictions of the Rob Porter excuses from the Aministration

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 15 2018 @ 10:23 AM
link   
Source - Here is a WaPo opinion article from Dana Milbank (WaPo's resident political satirist or something but he writes a lot of satire for WaPo).

This particular article is no exception. In it he does a severe takedown of Sarah Huckabee Sanders for giving contradictory statements about the Rob Porter scandal. While a fun read by itself, this article really encompasses the double talk, walk backs, and lack of transparency that has come to define this administration. How anyone can celebrate such a severe breakdown in communication and transparency is beyond me, but this # is ridiculous. It's about time to declare "Shenanigans" and go grab a broom.

I've included some of the good gems, but I suggest reading the whole article. It's chock full of contradictions.

White House officials “are all processing the shocking and troubling allegations made against” Porter, which is why they “hope he has a wonderful career and hopefully he will have a great career ahead of him.”


Porter “says he’s innocent and I think you have to remember that. He said very strongly yesterday that he’s innocent,” which explains why “it became apparent to us that the allegations were true.”


Porter “is someone of the highest integrity and exemplary character” and is the victim of “a coordinated smear campaign.” As a result, there is “no reason not to believe the women” who accused him, and his “resignation was appropriate.”


Resignation “was a personal decision that Rob made and one that he was not pressured to do, but one that he made on his own.” Furthermore, “we dismissed that person immediately.”


As of Sunday, the White House “had not received a final investigation” of Porter’s background because “the FBI has the ongoing investigations” had “not completed that investigation,” which is only logical given that the FBI gave the White House “a completed background investigation” in July and “closed the file” last month.


Kelly learned the details of Porter’s situation only “40 minutes before he threw him out,” last week, several months after Kelly reportedly was informed that allegations of spousal abuse were holding up Porter’s security clearance.


The “White House personnel security office,” which received the FBI’s background report on Porter, is part of “a process that doesn’t operate within the White House.”


I can keep going. There are more gems in that article but I'm about to bust a gut laughing while copying and pasting these idiocies. Enjoy.




posted on Feb, 15 2018 @ 11:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I wonder if Millbank solicited these talking points from the DNC like he did during the election.

But in reality, stringing together disparate quotes from different people in order to create contradictions is hackery at best.



posted on Feb, 15 2018 @ 11:40 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Yep. Leave it to LesMis to dismiss the administration being overtly hypocritical and contradicting of itself. Not surprised there.

PS: Those quotes are directly from the Administration. Some are even directly from Trump's Twitter account. Lol at "DNC talking points". Always gotta cop out with that bs excuse. Trump supporter protocol 101.
edit on 15-2-2018 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2018 @ 11:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t




Yep. Leave it to LesMis to dismiss the administration being overtly hypocritical and contradicting of itself. Not surprised there.

PS: Those quotes are directly from the Administration. Some are even directly from Trump's Twitter account. Lol at "DNC talking points". Always gotta cop out with that bs excuse. Trump supporter protocol 101.


Leave it to Krazyshot to treat a group of people like an individual. If this was one person talking, you and Milbank would have a point. But instead, you guys have to take disparate quotes from disparate times, disparate contexts, from a variety of people, in order to string them together to for the sake of a narrative. Great insight.

Anti-trumper fantasy and delusion 101.
edit on 15-2-2018 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2018 @ 12:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Your own disclaimer says this is satire.

Do you know what satire is?



posted on Feb, 15 2018 @ 12:45 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

So you don't think it is a bad thing that the administration cannot be consistent about its messaging on one of its staffers that is leaving under less than optimal conditions?

It's a wonder if you could ever find a fault with the administration.



posted on Feb, 15 2018 @ 12:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Could it be they have a willingness to give answers based on the info they have at the time when perhaps sometimes they should wait before they give statements.

Personally i like them to be forth coming with what they know in real time but it does create some seeming out of context talking points for oppositions.



posted on Feb, 15 2018 @ 12:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t




So you don't think it is a bad thing that the administration cannot be consistent about its messaging on one of its staffers that is leaving under less than optimal conditions?

It's a wonder if you could ever find a fault with the administration.


I think it's a good thing that there is varying opinion in the administration. A diversity of opinion within an administration is a sign of democracy, transparency, debate, and freedom of speech. Consensus is often a sign of conformity.



posted on Feb, 15 2018 @ 12:54 PM
link   
a reply to: howtonhawky

So speaking when you don't have all the facts is a good thing? For instance, saying that the FBI's background check hasn't finished only for the FBI to turn around and say that not only is it finished, but it had been finished for a month now.

People call what you are suggesting lies. You are saying that you prefer the administration lying to you until they get the correct facts and say differently.



posted on Feb, 15 2018 @ 12:56 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Reporting the facts surrounding a firing isn't a matter of opinions... You either report the facts or you lie, report something else, then get caught in your lie and are forced to back peddle. The administration opted to pursue the latter course.

But even talking about the opinions expressed. You have people like Kelly saying that he always liked the guy then saying that he never trusted him.



posted on Feb, 15 2018 @ 01:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: howtonhawky

So speaking when you don't have all the facts is a good thing? For instance, saying that the FBI's background check hasn't finished only for the FBI to turn around and say that not only is it finished, but it had been finished for a month now.

People call what you are suggesting lies. You are saying that you prefer the administration lying to you until they get the correct facts and say differently.


People that call that a lie would be ignorant and wrong.

If you ask me a question and i answer with the knowledge i have at the time of the question then that would not be lying.

I say it is forth coming and as soon as i have more info i will expand on my answer.

I would rather get that type of info rather than "we can not give details at this time".



posted on Feb, 15 2018 @ 01:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Reporting the facts surrounding a firing isn't a matter of opinions... You either report the facts or you lie, report something else, then get caught in your lie and are forced to back peddle. The administration opted to pursue the latter course.

But even talking about the opinions expressed. You have people like Kelly saying that he always liked the guy then saying that he never trusted him.


If what you say is true about Kelly's statement's, then you have a contradiction, and you can rightfully say Kelly was contradicting himself. But sewing together statements to invent contradictions, and then to turn around to condemn that group as being contradictory, is a bit low.



posted on Feb, 15 2018 @ 01:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: howtonhawky

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: howtonhawky

So speaking when you don't have all the facts is a good thing? For instance, saying that the FBI's background check hasn't finished only for the FBI to turn around and say that not only is it finished, but it had been finished for a month now.

People call what you are suggesting lies. You are saying that you prefer the administration lying to you until they get the correct facts and say differently.


People that call that a lie would be ignorant and wrong.

If you ask me a question and i answer with the knowledge i have at the time of the question then that would not be lying.

I say it is forth coming and as soon as i have more info i will expand on my answer.

I would rather get that type of info rather than "we can not give details at this time".



But that isn't what they said. They didn't say that they didn't know and more info was forthcoming. They lied said something wrong then backpeddled with an even sillier lie when caught in their previous lie.



posted on Feb, 15 2018 @ 01:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

perhaps but why is every wrong answer considered a lie to you???

If i get bad grades am i ignorant or am i a liar?

stories usually change as facts come out.

i remember reading on this site that according to many on scene investigators first hand witnesses accounts of events usually never match



posted on Feb, 15 2018 @ 01:14 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Here's the Daily Mailon Kelly's statements. He first defended them an then said he was "Shocked" about the allegations but then fired him 40 minutes after making that statement. Also it is known that Kelly had received messages about Porter months ago.

Still searching for the other quote though.



posted on Feb, 15 2018 @ 01:16 PM
link   
a reply to: howtonhawky
Are you really this obtuse or are you just messing with me? The administration literally got caught lying about knowing this guy's history and the status of his security clearance. Then they literally changed their story to something more nonsensical (that the White House was doing its version of a security clearance which wasn't finished or some nonsense). How is that not a lying to you?
edit on 15-2-2018 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2018 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t




Here's the Daily Mailon Kelly's statements. He first defended them an then said he was "Shocked" about the allegations but then fired him 40 minutes after making that statement. Also it is known that Kelly had received messages about Porter months ago.

Still searching for the other quote though.


Don't bother, I believe you.



posted on Feb, 15 2018 @ 01:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: LesMisanthrope



It's a wonder if you could ever find a fault with the administration.


Lets be honest: finding fault or not in this means zilch. We have real policy issues happening, in case you didn't know. This...this is just an opportunity to scream "HYPOCRITE" for the sake of catharsis.

No wonder the mention of "politics" makes people nauseous. This is what passes for it nowadays.



posted on Feb, 15 2018 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t


TIP: The Washington Post publishes both fake and leaked items that hurt the U.S.'s national security. Safe (and prudent) to ignore most of what that publication says.



posted on Feb, 15 2018 @ 01:21 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Defending a wife beater who had access to secret material while not having a security clearance is a nothing story to you? Hillary Clinton sat through how many investigations for alleged mishandling classified material and this dude has been handling the stuff since his hiring date and has gone at least a month where it was confirmed that he wasn't getting a clearance. That's on TOP of the fact that his abuse history was known to the administration for sometime (including by Kelly who went on to say that he didn't know about it until the news broke) and they didn't act on it.
edit on 15-2-2018 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join