Jump to content

The Deep State War Heats Up :ph34r:


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

The original story itself didn't change the perception of Trump and women -- which is why it was ineffective (speaking to it as a purely political weapon in this case). Everyone knew Trump's history, and voted for him anyway because it's irrelevant to many of them. I didn't vote for Trump, but this story didn't move me one way or the other. The only one that did was Katie Johnson -- until I looked under the hood of the story and learned it was fake. 

 

IF (and it's still an if) it were proven that Stormy lied about the entire affair, it changes nothing about the perceptions of Trump. That's not the point (hence the thread). The point would be what that says about the Clinton machine and the media's partnership. 

 

I know on this board you'd never admit this, but in private are you telling me if you were to learn 100% that Stormy never happened it would have no impact on your assessment of the information sources you've relied on in the past?

 

 

Joe's alleged past includes rape with far more sourcing/verification than any of the charges lobbed at Trump. Joe also has a long history of inappropriate touching/assault on camera that was so bad it was a joke within DNC circles (even Jon Stewart blasted him for it). 

 

One is not like the other.

 

I don't need to look any further than the past three years - and see how Trump treats people. Besides the fact that he is unfit to serve - his record with only politicking to those on the far right - flaming racial tensions; migrants, and LGTBQ - no matter what happens with the "deep state" - Trump (and his supporters) will forever be on the wrong side of history.

   

6 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

The original story itself didn't change the perception of Trump and women -- which is why it was ineffective (speaking to it as a purely political weapon in this case). Everyone knew Trump's history, and voted for him anyway because it's irrelevant to many of them. I didn't vote for Trump, but this story didn't move me one way or the other. The only one that did was Katie Johnson -- until I looked under the hood of the story and learned it was fake. 

 

IF (and it's still an if) it were proven that Stormy lied about the entire affair, it changes nothing about the perceptions of Trump. That's not the point (hence the thread). The point would be what that says about the Clinton machine and the media's partnership. 

 

I know on this board you'd never admit this, but in private are you telling me if you were to learn 100% that Stormy never happened it would have no impact on your assessment of the information sources you've relied on in the past?

 

 

Joe's alleged past includes rape with far more sourcing/verification than any of the charges lobbed at Trump. Joe also has a long history of inappropriate touching/assault on camera that was so bad it was a joke within DNC circles (even Jon Stewart blasted him for it). 

 

One is not like the other.

 

One is not like the other?  But who is in court right now fighting a rape/dna case?

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, BillStime said:

One is not like the other?  But who is in court right now fighting a rape/dna case?

 

They are both slime.

 

The answer to your question, though, is Trump. Donald Trump is in court right now fighting a rape/DNA case. He's a friend of Jeffrey Epstein's - just like Bill and Hillary.

 

ATK2LIVIWMI6TBZTJDEHENPTSY.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Buffalo_Gal said:


The cynical would say she's hoping not to have pay the money she owes him.

Honestly though, for those who thought about it (ewww) ... a germaphobe is gonna get nasty with a pr0n star? I mean maybe if he's triple sheathed, but Trump has women throwing themselves at him, and he'd choose her? <_<

 

Well yeah, cause look at the size of those.... er.... nevermind... ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

No *****. 

 

 

(this is now the second time she's said this, not the first)

 

That's fine and dandy, but is Tom Brady still the guy who intimidated her in the parking ramp?

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Quote

Like the European Union, Germany had until now only outlawed Hezbollah's military wing while tolerating its political wing.

 

Like the "political" and "military" wings were separable?

 

Quote

The group's "criminal activities and plannings for attacks are also taking place on German soil," Seehofer told Bild.

 

He also recalled that Hezbollah has openly called for "the violent destruction" of the Israeli state.

 

"It's part of our historic responsibility that we use all means under the rule of law to act against this," he said, in a nod to Germany's responsibility for the Holocaust during World War II.

 

It's good that they've finally put a total ban on Hezbollah, but ***** them Deutsch bastards for allowing them to freely operate on German soil for the past few decades.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Soon, there is going to be all out assaults on the people pushing back against the Deep State.

 

As the hands around the necks of the likes of James Comey gets tighter, the calls for the firing of the likes of Tucker Carlson getting fired are going to be much more fierce.

 

As predictable as the day is long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 


I hope Richard Grenell has excellent security. He has been doing work that has long been neglected, and I am certain he is making powerful enemies as he goes along.


 

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing to see here.

 

Quote

A new Democratic-aligned political action committee advised by retired Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the former head of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, is planning to deploy technology originally developed to counter Islamic State propaganda in service of a domestic political goal – to combat online efforts to promote President Donald Trump's handling of the coronavirus pandemic.

The group, Defeat Disinfo, will use artificial intelligence and network analysis to map discussion of the president's claims on social media. It will seek to intervene by identifying the most popular counter-narratives and boosting them through a network of more than 3.4 million influencers across the country – in some cases paying users with large followings to take sides against the president.

The initiative reflects fears within the Democratic Party that Trump's unwavering digital army may help sustain him through the pandemic, as it has through past controversies, even as the economy craters, tens of thousands have died, and Trump suffers in the polls.

 

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't recall any posts about the possible identity of Anonymous being revealed.

 

 

 

Paul Sperry article from 04/15/20

 

 

Quote

Ever since a “senior official in the Trump administration” penned an anonymous 2018 New York Times column attacking President Trump as unfit for office, Washington has been engrossed in a high-stakes whodunit. After an exhaustive investigation, the White House believes it’s cracked the case, identifying Trump's turncoat as his former deputy national security adviser, Victoria Coates, according to people familiar with the internal probe. 

Rather than fire Coates, the White House has quietly transferred her to the Department of Energy, where she awaits special assignment in Saudi Arabia -- far from the president.

...

The multiple sources interviewed by RealClearInvestigations either participated in the investigation of Coates or have direct knowledge of it. They spoke only on condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter. They say their evidence exposing Coates includes the following: 

  • Computer textual analyses revealing strikingly similar language, turns of phrase and historical references by both Coates and Anonymous.
  • Firsthand accounts by Anonymous of events —including during the presidential transition — witnessed only by Coates and a small number of others, the latter of whom were ruled out as suspects.
  • Hawkish foreign policy views held by Anonymous, many of which have been rejected by Trump.
  • The fact that Coates and Anonymous share a high-profile Washington literary agent with an author roster of disaffected ex-Trump officials.
  • Coates' long history of writing anonymously, and
  • Personal details revealed by Anonymous that are consistent with Coates’ biography.

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Putting this here too because it belongs: 

 

A large group of spooks believe it was released intentionally, but won't admit to that in public because it would mean war. 

 

Add this to the inflated numbers, the odd foot dragging in the House on impeachment, and the overall timing of the disaster itself and the picture begins to change quite rapidly. The question is: what will be done about it?

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Hedge said:

I don't recall any posts about the possible identity of Anonymous being revealed.

 

 

 

Paul Sperry article from 04/15/20

 

 

 

 

I hope she has had all of her security clearances revoked, regardless of whether she's in Saudi Arabia or not.

 

25 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

Putting this here too because it belongs: 

 

A large group of spooks believe it was released intentionally, but won't admit to that in public because it would mean war. 

 

Add this to the inflated numbers, the odd foot dragging in the House on impeachment, and the overall timing of the disaster itself and the picture begins to change quite rapidly. The question is: what will be done about it?

 

1.) I thought that Trump's IC had dubunked that pouncing conspiracy theory. The Washington ComPost told us so when they claimed McEnany was lying to the press!

 

2.) What can be done, without revealing the evidence? If they intentionally released it, and that can be proven, it doesn't necessarily mean we have to go to war. However, it would be cause to eliminate them from the global trade/financial system for a time. Let them join Russia's joke of an economic 'union', if they want to trade with someone.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

Putting this here too because it belongs: 

 

A large group of spooks believe it was released intentionally, but won't admit to that in public because it would mean war. 

 

Add this to the inflated numbers, the odd foot dragging in the House on impeachment, and the overall timing of the disaster itself and the picture begins to change quite rapidly. The question is: what will be done about it?

racist

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...