Why I'm Sure 90% Of The Anti-Trump Info Is Fake

[reinoe]

Seth Rich, slain DNC staffer, had contact with WikiLeaks, say multiple sources | Fox News

Using named sources with information that can be verified. Credible.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...4f199710b69_story.html?utm_term=.a49cb945f909

The Post is withholding most plot details...

He and others spoke on the condition of anonymity, citing the sensitivity of the subject.

Not credible just like all the anti-Trump garbage. And what kind of news organization refers to their stories as a "plot"? It's like they know they're spinning fiction. Also the story was refuted within MINUTES by a named government official. Minutes.

 

[reinoe]

You could have made your post a lot more succinct and effective by simply saying that you read it on Breitbart this morning.
They consistently scoop FOX.

Where did I reference Breitbart? That's pretty sad that you're just attacking a source I never even mentioned because you can't defend WaPo, nor should you. They're not a news organization anyway.

 

[RickJames3000]

Where did I reference Breitbart? That's pretty sad that you're just attacking a source I never even mentioned because you can't defend WaPo, nor should you. They're not a news organization anyway.

Yeah. I reconsidered that and deleted my post (obviously). FOX news and Breitbart are operating on the same sources of propaganda, but that was unfair of me.

But I do have a question for you... given your predilection for conspiracy theories...
Why are you ruling out the possibility that Seth Rich himself was working for the Russians?

 

[Crovax]

Seth Rich, slain DNC staffer, had contact with WikiLeaks, say multiple sources | Fox News

Using named sources with information that can be verified. Credible.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...4f199710b69_story.html?utm_term=.a49cb945f909

Not credible just like all the anti-Trump garbage. And what kind of news organization refers to their stories as a "plot"? It's like they know they're spinning fiction. Also the story was refuted within MINUTES by a named government official. Minutes.

Where does article reference itself as a "plot"

The only plot is the story is talking about a specific ISIS plot

He did not reveal the specific intelligence-gathering method, but he described how the Islamic State was pursuing elements of a specific plot and how much harm such an attack could cause under varying circumstances.

 

[Vox]

Seth Rich, slain DNC staffer, had contact with WikiLeaks, say multiple sources | Fox News

Using named sources with information that can be verified. Credible.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...4f199710b69_story.html?utm_term=.a49cb945f909

Not credible just like all the anti-Trump garbage. And what kind of news organization refers to their stories as a "plot"? It's like they know they're spinning fiction. Also the story was refuted within MINUTES by a named government official. Minutes.

It's actually more like 98% of the attacks on Trump are false.

The Corporate Media seem to think that if they tell these unsourced and unverified lies over and over long enough........the American people are so stupid that they'll believe them.

It is, however, getting old.

They're going to have to start coming up with real sources that stand up in public and verify the stories or everybody will just quit watching their crap.

:ind:

 

[Mr. Invisible]

Yeah. I reconsidered that and deleted my post (obviously). FOX news and Breitbart are operating on the same sources of propaganda, but that was unfair of me.

But I do have a question for you... given your predilection for conspiracy theories...
Why are you ruling out the possibility that Seth Rich himself was working for the Russians?

What evidence do you have that Rich was working for the Russians?

 

[reinoe]

Where does article reference itself as a "plot"

The only plot is the story is talking about a specific ISIS plot

WaPo likely edited the story without announcing it. Another mark that shows they have no credibility.

 

[Mycroft]

What evidence do you have that Rich was working for the Russians?

Liberals don't need evidence. They just need to think there is a possibility.

That makes it the truth.

 

[ocean515]

WaPo likely edited the story without announcing it. Another mark that shows they have no credibility.

Keep in mind, how desperate the media is right now.

For example, do you think the timing of Joe and Mika's claims about Kelly Anne Conway was in anyway influenced by the fact all the Ad Buyers are in New York right now deciding who gets a piece of their $9 billion advertising dollars?

Think ratings influence "stories"?

Upfronts 2017: Guide to TV Networks’ Scheduled Events, Parties | Variety

Another pilot season is dwindling down, which means that LA industry-ites are getting ready to head back east to schmooze with Madison Avenue for the weeklong television marathon that is Upfronts.

Keep this guide handy as you jet off to NYC to know where-and-when to be at Upfronts…

Monday, May. 15

NBCUniversal Upfront Presentation — Radio City Music Hall, 10:30 a.m.

Etc., Etc..​

 

[Mr. Invisible]

Liberals don't need evidence. They just need to think there is a possibility.

That makes it the truth.

I understand a lot of the underlying reasoning of why people are pushing the Russiagate nonsense and whatnot, but I am still baffled by the fact that so many people seem to believe anything negative about Trump and/or that the Russians control and are behind everything.

 

[Mycroft]

I understand a lot of the underlying reasoning of why people are pushing the Russiagate nonsense and whatnot, but I am still baffled by the fact that so many people seem to believe anything negative about Trump and/or that the Russians control and are behind everything.

For some...the left...they just cannot get over the fact that Hillary lost. For others...the right...they just can't get over the fact that Trump won.

And for many others...the useful idiots...they just believe anything they see on TV.

 

[Dittohead not!]

90% of "anti Trump" info is false. That would mean that:

Thousands of Muslims actually danced in the streets when the WTC was attacked,
Millions of illegal aliens actually voted for Clinton,
Mexico is actually sending us its rapists and drug dealers,
Hillary is really a criminal who needs to be locked up,
Obama was actually a Muslim from Kenya,
Mexico will pay for a wall on their northern border,
Trump knows more than the generals about how to defeat ISIS,
It's OK for men with power to grab women's genitals,
Obama actually paid Iran billions of dollars,
ISIS really did build a hotel in Syria,
Unemployment is really 18 to 20 percent,

only 10% of the above and the rest of the absurd statements attributed to Trump are really from his lips to our ears, all the rest are made up by the liberal media generating fake news.

 

[RickJames3000]

What evidence do you have that Rich was working for the Russians?

None.
I'm simply responding to a conspiracy tale with more of the same.

 

[Dittohead not!]

For some...the left...they just cannot get over the fact that Hillary lost. For others...the right...they just can't get over the fact that Trump won.

And for many others...the useful idiots...they just believe anything they see on TV.

It seems to me it's the Trump supporters who can't get over the fact that Hillary lost. They bring her up every time there is a story about something else that Trump has done. Hillary Clinton is not the POTUS, and therefore can not be blamed for the things that come out of the executive branch, and yet, Trump supporters love to bring her up as if she were somehow relevant to current events.

 

[Mycroft]

It seems to me it's the Trump supporters who can't get over the fact that Hillary lost. They bring her up every time there is a story about something else that Trump has done. Hillary Clinton is not the POTUS, and therefore can not be blamed for the things that come out of the executive branch, and yet, Trump supporters love to bring her up as if she were somehow relevant to current events.

Oh...I'm not saying the left is talking about Hillary all that much. Heck, why would they? She lost. They don't want the reminders. (which is why the right keeps reminding them LOL)

I'm saying that the fact that she lost is their motivation for doing everything they can to damage Trump.