Random Politics & Religion #23 (Fake News)

That's only one scoop though.

Not at all, at least not in the case of my comment. It was actually a discussion about your character. Or lack thereof. Not a detraction from another argument.

Reposting. To emphasize, McMaster is on the record of declining to say whether or not the intel discussed was classified. He specifically dodged that topic again today, after not including it in his statement yesterday. They are only denying that Trump didn't share the source of the intel, which was probably the Israelis. But they refuse to say that the intel was not classified, even after being pressed on it.

Bro calm down bro this is the internet !

Um...do you know what ad hominem attacks are?

It's really simple. It's attacks on the person instead of the topic at hand. Which is clearly against the rules but those rules are relaxed due to the heated nature of political debate.

Which is why I state that those attacks happen quite often, and directed towards me, Saevel, and Nausi quite often than not. Happens too often to care anymore.

Hell, I don't even bother with reports, unless the attack is very personal in nature and those generally are followed up with a PM to the closest loser I can find, usually Kojo.

Also, I'm not below making a few ad hominem attacks myself. I would be hypocritical and outright lying if I said that I don't do them. I try not to do them as often as some though, and even then, I don't get too personal on those attacks.

No "Yo mama" jokes from me.

Well, that goes counter to a previous post you made today. And not even an hour ago even.

Geeze Vic, get your story straight!

Also, yet another analysis for Vic to deny

Key point:


Can't wait for Vic to defend Obama on this again.

My name is hugh mungus nice to meet all of you !

Libs crossing their fingers really hard for a new national scandal and someone besides them give a crap about it.

#noonecares

Meanwhile they're silent on the murder of DNC staffer and Wikileaks supplier Seth Rich.

Another pot kettle situation?

No, it doesn't. It only counters your made up claims of McMaster and Tillerson saying no classified intel was shared. This isn't hard for me at all, I think by now everyone has seen you don't have anything. Don't feel bad, when the Trump WH doesn't even have an effective explanation, we can hardly expect his supporters to.

Its front page news on every conservative news outlet, its all Congress is talking about, our allies are concerned with it, and nausi doesn't care. Boo hoo.

Someone point out to Nausi that this was supposed to be satirical.

Nope, nice try though

They really grasping now, anything that can be twisted is being twisted lol.

I'll reiterate the same things I said back when Obama got elected and the Conservatives went nuclear. If your going to ding or hate on someone, do it for stuff they actually did, don't hate them for *** you invented.

Its funny because all the Trump WH needs to do is come out and say "Yeah, we may have *** up a bit there, our bad." And the story is gone. But no, they have to come out and put massive spin on it, and not actually deny it, just for feels.

Officer Robbinson who initially responded to the Seth Rich shooting went to Georgetown when Podesta taught there. His sister also worked for Hillary Clinton.

The story would be gone? Yeah that's what the media want...

Hahahahahabahahahahahahahha!

Yeah, the media doesn't let anything go these days. It's the age of spin. They'd just launch a new angle on it.

Of course, even if the WH did say something strong enough to make them stop reporting on it, they'd fill the gaps with whatever ***they got loaded in their ***cannon.

If the WH wants to keep lying about it go for it. It hasn't been hard to debunk them as of yet. How are those rasmussen numbers looking these days nausi?

Officials who were actually present in the room have already made statements saying nothing classified was discussed. Those same officials have already called the WAPO story complete fabricated ***.

Earlier I even linked the executive order establishing classification criteria which also describes how things are classified and declassified. This pertains to the statements regarding methods / sources / ect which is very important because that's how something is determined to be classified and what restrictions it has on dissemination.

No it won't, and you know it.

This has been debunked a few times already. But I'm sure you guys will keep trying to say it.

Debunked? Can you source the "debunking" please?

Cause all I see is you saying "no u!"

Sure, I don't mind reposting their official statements:

No where in these statements will you see a denial of classified intel being shared. They focus purely on denying that the source was shared. Like I said, this isn't hard.

Thanks for proving Saevel's point.

Or are you going to deny your own quotes?

$50 in Bison Bucks says that Vic denies his own quotes.

Can you point out where in those quotes do they say nothing classified was discussed?