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.
originally posted by: network dude
originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: MotherMayEye
Does it not seem strange that every time there is a new major screw up at the white house, there's instantly a shady counter-story with zero evidence promoted by right wing media?
Might want to look into which story came first.
originally posted by: Gin
a reply to: underwerks
Sure looks like a cover up to me. WaPo doesn't provide any evidence with their claim, just their usual smear writing.
originally posted by: underwerks
originally posted by: network dude
originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: MotherMayEye
Does it not seem strange that every time there is a new major screw up at the white house, there's instantly a shady counter-story with zero evidence promoted by right wing media?
Might want to look into which story came first.
Rehashing an old story doesn't make it new.
originally posted by: underwerks a reply to: MotherMayEye Does it not seem strange that every time there is a new major screw up at the white house, there's instantly a shady counter-story with zero evidence promoted by right wing media?
originally posted by: underwerks
originally posted by: network dude
originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: MotherMayEye
Does it not seem strange that every time there is a new major screw up at the white house, there's instantly a shady counter-story with zero evidence promoted by right wing media?
Might want to look into which story came first.
Rehashing an old story doesn't make it new.
originally posted by: Gin
a reply to: underwerks
Sure looks like a cover up to me. WaPo doesn't provide any evidence with their claim, just their usual smear writing.
originally posted by: jtma508
I'm sure this will be labelled as yet another 'false news outlet' since it runs counter to the narrative-of-choice but I've found these guys to be reliable in the past...
source
originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: underwerks
It's not like the press doesn't try to get statements before running stories.
originally posted by: WhateverYouSay
I can understand why wikileaks wouldn't want to talk about leakers if they were alive, by you'd think that they'd want to confirm it if he was killed. It would definitely help prove how terrible their enemies are.
originally posted by: face23785
originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: underwerks
It's not like the press doesn't try to get statements before running stories.
Actually it's a lot like that, that's become almost standard procedure anymore. An anonymous source tells you something juicy that looks bad for Trump? Don't ask Trump, the WH, or any of the other people who were in the room for comment. Just run it.
Recent example
originally posted by: GTBighair
originally posted by: WhateverYouSay
I can understand why wikileaks wouldn't want to talk about leakers if they were alive, by you'd think that they'd want to confirm it if he was killed. It would definitely help prove how terrible their enemies are.
I agree...
sorry, I can't figure out how to post a youtube vid.... grrrr
what is taking so long?