Low Life Liars …Will Be Caught

a reply to: queenofswords

You are right with that, I think your President will sort the lot of them out. About time someone did ay?

a reply to: queenofswords
I honestly hope you're correct. Thing is, he hasn't been in office long enough yet to know what he's going to do just yet. Another thing, to think he's going to be able to institute any REAL change on his own is foolhardy. People have a tendency to think the "President" wields more power than he does in reality.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Krazysh0t

What I believe is Flynn's party ate one their own because they just can't stand the thought of not being in power.

Oh I agree that the Trump admin threw him to the wolves as a political scapegoat. That is beyond obvious since they used a textbook way of doing it by forcing his resignation. Too bad that since Trump knew about this for the last three weeks this isn't going to just blow over.

What I believe is the intelligence community is filled with political hacks doing everything they can to destroy and obstruct a lawfully elected president.

What's going on right now is beyond petty.

Its damn right disgraceful, and treasonous.

Yes making sure that the President acts on national security concerns IS petty... /sarc

originally posted by: damwel
Bush and Cheney made whistleblowing illegal. Don't you remember that.

Do people remember THIS ?

www.washingtonsblog.com...

The Obama administration has secured 526 months of prison time for national security leakers, versus only 24 months total jail time for everyone else since the American Revolution.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: gortex

I agree soficrow , those leaking information are doing so for a reason , the Intelligence services are sworn to protect America and if leaking information is the only way they feel they can do that then that's the way it is

Is that before or after overthrowing foreign governments, and running drugs filling their off shore bank accounts from illicit sales.

Alongside I guess.

originally posted by: soficrow
When the powerful lie, we rely on whistleblowers for the truth.

That is what journalists used to do. Still do.
'Whistleblowers' are/can be as biased as anyone.
No one should ever be believed!

a reply to: gortex

I support whistle blowers , they are our last line of defence from tyranny.

Me too, and agreed.

It's not a party issue. It's about protecting democracy.

The Veterans Administration has a very extensive Whistle Blower program. Not sure if it works. The problem is that you're asking the Fox to guard the Hen House.

Since everything we say and type is recorded somewhere, Whistle Blowing on a government perp can get you (mysteriously) killed.

a reply to: namelesss

If you never believed in something, why do you believe what a guy named Buddha said a couple thousand years ago?

Shooot... ATS members blow the whistle here all the time.

You can tell when the anti truth league piles on a post in force, focusing on the messenger, discrediting and ridiculing them instead of addressing the content of their post.

By design this (Generally), derails the thread, dragging worthwhile content off the page and into obscurity.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

For someone who won a election because of leaks from the opposition, the Trump camp doesn't look very sincere going after whistleblowers when its their turn for their feet to be held to the fire.

The one you referenced.

originally posted by: namelesss

originally posted by: soficrow
When the powerful lie, we rely on whistleblowers for the truth.

That is what journalists used to do. Still do.
'Whistleblowers' are/can be as biased as anyone.
No one should ever be believed!

The truth is whats left over after debunking the lies around it. Like purifying metals, mining ore, reduction in a furnace and pouring the refined metal.

This is a precess of ferreting out the truth reducing it in the furnace of ATS and pouring the purified truth into receptacles.

a reply to: shooterbrody

There were 9 of them

a reply to: Krazysh0t

GREAT link. Thanks.

From your article, here's the timeline:

...Flynn told Vice President-elect Mike Pence and Trump spokesman Sean Spicer that the sanctions never came up in his talks. Pence and Spicer repeated the denials in public.

But that wasn’t true.

On Jan. 26, the Justice Department told Trump’s White House counsel that Flynn’s version was untrue — and that the apparent deception could make him vulnerable to blackmail from Russia. Still, Flynn continued to deny the report.

Then, on Feb. 9, the Post reported that nine current and former officials said Flynn’s version was untrue. On Feb. 12, the Post added the possibility of Russian blackmail into the mix. On Feb. 13, Flynn resigned.

Two items jump out from that timeline. One is that Trump knew for more than two weeks that Flynn had misled Pence and Spicer, but did nothing about it. The second is the unusual number of sources in the Post’s Feb. 9 article: “nine current and former officials who were in senior positions” at the time of Flynn’s phone call.

That’s not a leak; that’s an insurrection.

And the precedents:

As Trump tries to remake Washington in his own image, it seems he’s going to run into plenty of national security bureaucrats who won’t merely be reluctant to cooperate; they’ll be ready to blow the whistle if the administration does something they consider improper.

That’s far from unprecedented.

In the Watergate scandal that brought down President Nixon, many of the most important leaks came from “Deep Throat,” a source who turned out to be Mark Felt, an associate director of the FBI. His motive, it appears, was to stop Nixon from turning the bureau into a politicized arm of the White House.


In the Iran-Contra scandal that entangled President Reagan, many of the leaks about illicit weapons deals came from the national security bureaucracy, too — some from officials who thought Reagan’s secret arms sales to Iran were a bad idea, others from officials who thought the National Security Council staff had exceeded its authority.

And this:

The leaks will continue. For some bureaucrats, they’re a matter of institutional survival. For a few, they’re a matter of honor. In a well-run, self-policing government, they wouldn’t be necessary. But in the Trump administration, they’re likely to be more important than ever.

Makes sense to me.

But I've always been behind Wikileaks et al.

a reply to: soficrow

US ties to Russia and the sharing of intelligence goes 200 Years.

www.state.gov...

I guess we most forget all those historical facts.

Because is Trumps fault.

a reply to: marg6043

Huh? From the OP:

When the powerful lie, we rely on whistleblowers for the truth.

Without our whistleblowers we do not have a hope in hades of protecting ourselves, our families or our nations. We need whistleblowers.

...

So whomever is outed:

Support Our Whistleblowers!

We need them. Without them, we don’t know what is being done in our names, with our money. Without them, we’ll never

Catch the Low Life Liars!

…and as always, Follow the Money! Find out: What’s the Quid Pro Quo? Ask, Who really benefits here?

a reply to: soficrow

Oh, don't get me wrong I support whistle blowers, one hundred percent. But I reserve the right to take that information and research it, no let the media do a propagandized research for me, that is what is been happening now.

Because the agendas are clear, sometimes the information may not be as reliable as it seems.

a reply to: marg6043

...the agendas are clear

Yeppers. The Republican Party used Trump and his Russian connections to get them into the White House, and now it's done, they'll cut him loose and let Pence take the reins.


lol.

a reply to: soficrow

I don't think is going to be like that, Sofi, it needs more than here say to take a president.

Now, what I am glad is surfacing is the fact that the agencies are after the President and rightful government of this nation.

No, good, Sofi regardless of whom maybe the president at any given time.

This is an unauthorized breach of information that is classify, secret and falls under the laws on national security.

One thing is to give away information that is important for the people, but another is to break laws when it comes of secret deals that goes around between the nations leadership and other nations until is deemed declassified.

That can damage the nations security and undermine our nation safety.

The same thing is having news media doing propaganda on issues or stories that can not be backed just to create a hysterical response from the people.