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.

 

OBAMA Admin took their Iran Deal MSM Leak Operation and Weaponized it To Hurt Donald Trump.

page: 2
27
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 04:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: carewemust

Of course, the Obama administration were psychic and knew that Trump would be elected!



This is really the most stupid crap. You win the grand prize.



I'll say to you the same i have said to phage, stop trolling politics because you're not good at it.

You stick to science and let us nimwits figure it out mkay?


Phage isn’t even good at pretending he knows science anymore... it’s like he’s not even trying any more... or the checks aren’t clearing... either way... I digress...




posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 05:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

as expected, congratulations on your win!




Your intellectual capacity is impressive, here have a cookie..



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 06:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Rewey
a reply to: chr0naut

Hmmm... Seems like you've misunderstood every single part of the OP? Kudos.


Nope.

No-one really thought that Trump would win. He wasn't the popular vote and the swing towards Trump by the electoral college came out of 'left field'.

The OP is 'fake news' and assumes a level of prescience that I doubt exists, even in the most 'out there' hypotheses.


eh?

many knew he was going to win.

why else would Hillary snap at the people '' why arent I 50 pts ahead? ''
why else would strzok, page, comey and Mccabe start plotting the ''russian narrative'' before the election?

The article isnt saying Obama and co knew he'd win in 2015, its saying they setup the 'echo chamber' for the media and DNC collusion in 2015 and used it in 2016 to lambast Trump



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 08:57 AM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

Actually the only reliable poll had Trump winning and you didn't understand the op at all. The Iran deal had nothing to do with Trump being elected.



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 09:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: carewemust

Of course, the Obama administration were psychic and knew that Trump would be elected!



This is really the most stupid crap. You win the grand prize.




you are respected here for being level headed and intelligent. This post is neither. Please don't let your emotions drive your reputation. This place will need you back when all this is over in 2024.



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 05:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: chr0naut


If your diet consists mainly of CNN and/or MSNBC, I totally understand why you feel it's all malarkey.


I'm not an American and I don't visit those sites or ever watch American news services such as FOX, CNN or MSNBC.

I prefer actual news reporting rather than non-stop 'talking head' opinions. But, as I understand it, they don't have 'just news' anymore in the United States, where It seems to be all about who delivers it.



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 05:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: chr0naut
Obama Admin "players" saw the wind blowing over chairs at Hillary's outdoor rallies because no one was in them. Just because Obama was cold and uncaring, didn't negate him from being intuitive and conniving.



You do know that she did actually win the popular vote?

I also recall the massive turnout for Obama's inauguration and relative no-show for Trump's (but he did have a lot more women protesting against him, there).



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 05:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: carewemust

Of course, the Obama administration were psychic and knew that Trump would be elected!



This is really the most stupid crap. You win the grand prize.



I'll say to you the same i have said to phage, stop trolling politics because you're not good at it.

You stick to science and let us nimwits figure it out mkay?


Thank you for the sideways compliment (I think)?



I just think that you are ascribing far more to the (ex)politicians than they were actually capable of.



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 06:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Rewey
a reply to: chr0naut

No, again I really think you're missing the point of the OP.

It's saying that a 'leak strategy' was developed as far back as 2015 to help win over public support for various policies, such as the Iran deal. It relied on the MSM on the basis that if they wanted to receive 'leaks of confidential material', they had to publish stories in a manner which supported an agenda. If they didn't play along, then no more 'inside scoops'.

The OP suggests that this 'leak strategy' was LATER 'weaponised' against Trump.

It's not suggesting it all originated from some precognitive vision of the future to damage Trump.


The idea of leaking government information to oppose that government, has existed for centuries before America even existed.

One such ancient historical case of 'leaking' was the rebuilding of Jerusalem under Artaxerxes and the exposure of the letters and plans from regional vassal 'kings' surrounding Jerusalem, which allowed Nehemiah to organize defense against those vassal kings and to protect workers while the fortifications for the city were being constructed. The account is in the Bible in the book of Nehemiah and occurred about the 5th century BC.

'Leaking' has been a familiar tool of American politics, since before the American Revolutionary war. It didn't start in 2015.

So it hasn't been any more 'weaponized' against Trump that with any other governor or president.

Obama had far more leaks against his government than Trump, but Obama successfully prosecuted the leakers without drawing the world's attention to the leaks until after they had been dealt with, while Trump has shown far less capability and actually publicizes the leaks against him but doesn't seem to be able to deal with the leakers without broadcasting everything.



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 06:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

The idea of leaking government information to oppose that government, has existed for centuries before America even existed.



Jesus, no. You're still not getting this...?

These are not leaks from a hostile insider to undermine a government. They're talking about a deliberate set of leaks BY THE GOVERNMENT, so the media will use the scoop to promote an agenda. Any media who didn't promote the agenda would not receive further 'inside scoops' (pretending to be 'leaks'), and therefore their competition in the MSM would be seen to be better at investigative journalism.

Is this starting to make sense? Not bad leaks to undermine. Deliberate leaks to promote an agenda.



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 06:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: chr0naut

Actually the only reliable poll had Trump winning and you didn't understand the op at all. The Iran deal had nothing to do with Trump being elected.


There was only one reliable poll? You've really swallowed the cool aid.

I would counter that what the OP is about, is paranoid propaganda that fails rational analysis and that people are supporting so much cognitive dissonance and becoming so distanced from the processes of true skepticism, that they really, actually, deeply, believe and know for a fact, stuff that they just made up.

I mean, it seems that the average American would rather die free with their subsistence wage, a tower of unassailable debt, no hope for a better future and their gun barrels in their mouths. They salute the flag, with hand on heart, of the government that is ensuring that they will never have better options.

Take for instance the American presidential elections. A choice out of two bad candidates isn't really freedom to choose. There should have been a range of suitable (and unsuitable) contenders. Why only two and why so crap?

Can't you see that Americans are being deceived and manipulated at the highest levels? That manipulated markets, gun and health laws in America are attritional rather than protective?

edit on 13/9/2018 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 07:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Rewey

originally posted by: chr0naut

The idea of leaking government information to oppose that government, has existed for centuries before America even existed.



Jesus, no. You're still not getting this...?

These are not leaks from a hostile insider to undermine a government. They're talking about a deliberate set of leaks BY THE GOVERNMENT, so the media will use the scoop to promote an agenda. Any media who didn't promote the agenda would not receive further 'inside scoops' (pretending to be 'leaks'), and therefore their competition in the MSM would be seen to be better at investigative journalism.

Is this starting to make sense? Not bad leaks to undermine. Deliberate leaks to promote an agenda.


I do get that but the government can simply say all sorts of 'in your face' BS without having witch hunts and finger pointing. Why not just have Trump tweet stuff that is supposed to be confidential, like he has so many times before.

You don't have to 'weaponize' policy, so why bother?



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 07:44 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

This week you didn't miss a thing by not watching the MSM TV stations. All weather doom. I turned them off myself 2 days ago. But I will check now to see if the East Coast is still there.



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 08:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
I do get that but the government can simply say all sorts of 'in your face' BS without having witch hunts and finger pointing. Why not just have Trump tweet stuff that is supposed to be confidential, like he has so many times before.

You don't have to 'weaponize' policy, so why bother?


Firstly, because leaking of material which is actually considered classified, confidential or sensitive is against the law. However, the press have certain protections to maintain the anonymity of a source, which means they are not normally required to disclose the source. This means you can use their protections by proxy to promote your agenda.

Secondly, because a random tweet from Trump (which, again, is not what the OP is about) is only a single voice from the person trying to push an agenda, and is easily dismissed. However, having a number of media outlets giving positive spin for a policy you're about to announce means that the public is often 'warmed up' ahead of time. This makes it easier to gain public support for prickly issues, such as dealing with Iran.

Lastly, the OP referred to it as 'weaponised' as it was a practice normally used to promote your own agenda to make your job easier, but it was later used to denigrate Trump in the media, and therefore the public eye, which means it's no longer being used as a tool of promotion but as a weapon to attack your opponent.

That's about as clear as I can make it...



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 08:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Rewey


What you described sounds similar to how corporate "insiders" ILLEGALLY leak info to drive up a stock price. They sell. Stock plummets.



posted on Sep, 14 2018 @ 01:09 AM
link   
9.13.2018

Congressmen Mark Meadows and Jim Jordan know which reporters colluded with the Obama Administration and Obama holdovers.


The information being leaked was not substantiated in any way and was strictly designed to harm the president.

Earlier, Jordan told Fox Business‘ Stuart Varney that one Left-wing ‘mainstream’ reporter had 13 contacts in the FBI feeding him information — making the bureau nothing less than a Soviet-style propaganda mill for the Deep State.

Thursday night, Meadows told Hannity that the House Government and Oversight Committee has the names of scores of media hacks working specifically with the anti-Trump Deep State to thwart the president and take him down.

“There are dozens of other documents that will support the fact that Peter Strzok and Lisa Page had ongoing relationships with multiple reporters and that they were feeding them information to spin a narrative against this president,” he said.
But he also dropped some other well-known names.

“We know that James Comey leaked, we know that Andrew McCabe leaked, we know that Peter Strzok and Lisa Page leaked. We also know that the reporters who they leaked to know that they leaked. And look, we got names. We also have the reporters’ names,” he added.

In all, the FBI, Justice Department and the CIA were leaking anti-Trump garbage.
Source: thenationalsentinel.com...



posted on Sep, 14 2018 @ 01:53 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

Sure does.

The sad thing is, it's actually a really effective strategy, and probably necessary when dealing with certain prickly issues, but it does mean a compromised press (which Trump has been saying for years now), which is never a good thing.

And against an electoral candidate is obviously making the system incredibly one-sided (as we saw in 2016).



posted on Sep, 15 2018 @ 09:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Rewey


With declassification of several "Spygate" related documents imminent, the House Intel Committee chairman (Devin Nunes) said today that JOURNALISTS and DEMOCRATS will be "FRIGHTENED" by what is revealed.

dailycaller.com...

"Pee their pants, (and pantsuits)" would be more accurate than "frightened", imo.



posted on Sep, 15 2018 @ 10:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: Vector99

Aw snookems insults all you got

well I decided to fight you on an even level playing field, so I went full idiot and lost due to your experience.
lmfao, "Face to Foot" style, huh? "My nuts to your fist" move is my personal fav 🤣



posted on Sep, 15 2018 @ 10:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Rewey


With declassification of several "Spygate" related documents imminent, the House Intel Committee chairman (Devin Nunes) said today that JOURNALISTS and DEMOCRATS will be "FRIGHTENED" by what is revealed.

dailycaller.com...

"Pee their pants, (and pantsuits)" would be more accurate than "frightened", imo.


I would dearly love to see that, but words like 'may release' and 'could release' makes me not want to get my hopes up.

It's frustrating because I think the redactions are no longer being used to protect national security, etc, but as a political carrot on both sides:

Dems: "the bad stuff about Trump is in those redactions..."

Reps: "the redactions hide the really bad stuff about the Dems..."

I think that given how divided the country has been along hyper-partisan lines for the past two years, the best thing for the American people is to just lay the whole sorry affair bare. Use it like a 'reset switch' and fresh start. The public know the bullsh!t that politicians have been up to for years. The public isn't entirely stupid.

Not like Hillary's reset button for Russia, but you know... A real one.




top topics



 
27
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join