Yeah, don’t you know that the CIA has never lied to the American public? That they’ve never lied about their analysis because a president exerted influence over them?
You could literally quote that and just change it to media and be at the same point. GIGO.
So in the end you have smear rags just spouting things on anonymous sources and then readers handpicking what to believe when it aligns with their preformed bias. If a figure in govt says Trump bad (even unnamed without context), Orange man bad! If says Trump good, govt lies!
This is literally the level of mental retardation we’re dealing with.
You could literally quote that and just change it to media and be at the same point. GIGO.
So in the end you have smear rags just spouting things on anonymous sources and then readers handpicking what to believe when it aligns with their preformed bias. Awesome!
If a figure in media says Trump Good (even unnamed without context), MAGA! If says Trump bad, FAKE NEWS!
This is literally the level of mental retardation we’re dealing with. No actual concrete counter point or counter evidence.
^ This is my point.
Unlike you, I just don’t choose a side. One thing I don’t do is discredit evidence in favor of none.
You’re the biggest hypocrite here because you let the ends justify the means with the bias in your reasoning you became what you despise. No actual concrete counter point or counter evidence. I don’t even care one way or another, it’s the sh_i_t level of reasoning the offends me. Earlier you tried to call me out with some whataboutism (you love throwing that around) on some other point then backed off when I didn’t stick to some partisan line. Seems like a lot of hypocrisy. When the ends justify the means on biased reasoning you end up just looking like what you despise.
My only point was that you have an anonymous smear peice that offers no verifiable evidence but the CIA is publicly calling it BS. and all the libtards just plug their ears and wonder why they look stupid.
Dude, you literally defended the integrity of the CIA and I cited them lying to the American public.
I don’t think there’s even any reasoning there. Literally just a link to wikipedia. I aint no harvey dent.
I never took a side on the topic, I simply pointed out the sole verifiable points of evidence. Unlike you, I don’t vote, I just find the bias laughable. But, like I said before. The bitter irony of losers is that they aren’t even good at losing.
Ok, look, it’s very simple. If you have one very clear data point saying the total opposite. And the other is no verifiable datapoints, that constitutes a garbage. People then defending that garbage are called idiots. Two clear cases of you promoting and defending news articles that were debunked within hours with apologies. This was just off the top of my head.
You defending the fake buzzfeed news article:
[quote=“Schopenhauer”]
At some point you’re just a sad caricature ready to run with whatever bone gets tossed your way.
Sure, I’ll address those. I wouldn’t really call “Curious to see if this is picked up by more outlets or if more info comes out – an interesting developing story.” a wholehearted endorsement of the article. I knew is was an unverified story, which is why I was waiting for other outlets to pick it up, something like the times. But it was developing, and interesting.
For the second one, I was wrong. Republicans genuinely don’t care.
But i did also learn that Buzzfeed news is a legitimate news wing of buzzfeed.
But please, continue.
The reason this routinely happens to you is you’re apparently incapable of logically weighing the evidence (or lack thereof) so you posted fake news, then defended the truth of another fake news, now trying to fill out the cycle with a third unverified peice. I never took a stance on it simply pointed out that objectively, this story lacks evidence in the face of pretty strong counter evidence. Maybe that changes, who knows. Regardless, you are literally what you accuse the other side of, a sad version of it because somehow you think you’re different.
I hereby christen you LibTurd for your right wing counterpart.
Glad I’ve finally awaken my third eye.
Trump truly is amazing though. I never though any person could bring cnn to its knees. Fnn is a joke. Haha
NY Times and Washington Post confirm the CNN story.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/09/us/politics/cia-informant-russia.html
It’s funny because you originated one of the other later retracted stories that LibTurd got busted defending. Tweetle dee and tweetle dumb.
Unfortunately in your rush to lobotomize the topic you failed to read your first article past the headline and now reinforced it with two more headlines, apparently without reading the content again.
From your own “confirming” WaPo article:
"That disclosure alarmed U.S. national security officials, but it was not the reason for the decision to remove the CIA asset, who had provided information to the United States for more than a decade, according to the current and former officials."
As we’ve established you’re a biased NPC with an IQ of about 10, obviously the point made by the CIA in their explicit statement that they did pull an asset but that it had nothing to do with Trump flew right over your head. What a literal idiot, I love it.
In a way, it’s a sad shame really. If Frisian and LibTurd had just been brainwashed by alternate marketing they would have made great Trump supporters.
[BS’s usual personal insults deleted]
Shrug. I don’t think any of us can know why the source thought it was time to get out of there. Evidently he reached a point where he perceived the risk of staying in Russia as too high, and I suspect numerous factors contributed to that. I’d be curious to hear anything this person had to say, and I’d approach statements from CIA spokespeople and paraphrased reportage with circumspection.
What I find particularly interesting is why we’re hearing about this now.
^This is all fine. I’m even saying its possible since we don’t have all the information that maybe that is what happened (with the caveat that the CIA and not the source makes the final decision to extract). I don’t really care about the story itself.
It’s the irresponsible reporting of “BIG HEADLINE” followed by three paragraphs of sensational speculation and anonymous sources then at the end a blurb saying that the only pieces of verifiable official evidence unequivocally say this is a fake story. Like this “we reported it accurately” *wink wink*. They’re burying it because frankly people don’t have any interest in the truth, thinking or reading, which is why your corroborated it with articles literally saying official sources all said the story was false. Then this fake news gets exacerbated being shared around and the same people want to complain about fake news and election interference and their counterparts on the right doing the same thing when you’re all just mirror versions of the same clowns.
I’m not even saying Fox isn’t doing the same thing, and that it isn’t also idiotic when Trumptards do this.
All I am actually saying is that I wish people would keep their idiocy to themselves.
This is a great article. It really is a personality cult. I’m not going to get drawn into a debate here, but it’s simply not possible for a rational and intelligent person to believe that Trump should be in charge of this country. He is a child in a mans body. An absolute intellectual and moral vacuum. An NY trust fund kid who somehow persuaded the working class that he has their best interests at heart…and ‘rational’ is the key word here. The left keep on with the ‘this must be the final straw now’ whenever the latest outrage occurs, because they still believe that they can appeal to these people on a rational level, when they simply can’t. His supporters will either ignore or dismiss his obvious shortcomings, or they just don’t care, because he’s ‘owning the libs’. The irony is, they consider themselves to be patriots, when they are supporting someone with a very obvious disdain for the very concept of democracy.
