Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Top intel officials clear Trump campaign


Ashotep

Recommended Posts

 

Quote

White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus said Sunday that high-ranking U.S. intelligence officials have assured the administration that none of President Trump’s campaign aides had contact with Russian spies and that news reports that speculate otherwise are “complete garbage.”

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/19/reince-priebus-white-house-chief-intel-cleared-tru/

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Washington Times (AKA The Moonie Times) is Washington, D.C.'s newspaper which perpetually plays second fiddle to the Washington Post. The Times lost money from its inception in 1982 until 2015, in which it finally became profitable.[1]

Started by Unification Church founder Sun Myung Moon, the Church has pumped over $1.7 billion into the paper to keep it afloat.[2] Although much of the early Times staff came from the defunct Washington Star, the paper's board of directors was made up of members of the Unification Church, with the staff undergoing occasional purges, resignations, and faction fights over the direction of the paper.[3] No less an authority than the Rev. Moon himself has proclaimed the Times a "gift" to America to thank the U.S. for fighting Communism in Korea, or something like that.[4] In 2002 Rev. Moon outdid himself by proclaiming he established the Times "in response to heaven's direction" and that "The Washington Times will become the instrument in spreading the truth about God to the world."[5]

The editorial slant of the Washington Times is notably conservative and partisan in favor of the Republican Party. On occasion, they do some bang-up investigative journalism and muckraking, sometimes on other conservative groups which the Moonies are involved in intramural feuds with. Usually though, the Times is a quaint bore, ever pining for a return to the glory days of the 1850s or 1920s, and Ronald Reagan's befuddled dreams of reactionary radicalism.

The paper promotes all sorts of wingnut idiocies curiosities, including various pseudosciences (creationism, anti-environmentalism, global warming denial, false claims about abortion and abstinence-only sex education) and bigotry (homophobia, transphobia, Islamophobia, anti-secularism).

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=13&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwj3gq6r153SAhVl2IMKHS6RDT0QFghiMAw&url=http%3A%2F%2Frationalwiki.org%2Fwiki%2FThe_Washington_Times&usg=AFQjCNHl51b89PeZj2pwKFZosk6eswu10Q

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Typical tactic, attack the source rather than the contents.

 

edit: and using rationalwiki as the source?  That whole site is The Onion tier!

Edited by EnderOTD
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, EnderOTD said:

Typical tactic, attack the source rather than the contents.

Garbage in, garbage out?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, if you're ok with Moonie news...a publication that is known to be biased and traffic in bigotry...a paper whose sole purpose is to promote the Moonie world view...then ok. 

Just thought people might like to know where this "info" is coming from. A lot of people don't check out their sources to see if they're reliable, anymore. They just see something they want to believe, and link it. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well rationalwiki can be edited by literally anyone, just like wikipedia.  You would be hard pressed to find anything that pertains to mainstream politics that doesn't have a edit war on those sites these days.  Grain of salt and all of that.  I don't find it any less credible than NY post or guardian tbh.

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok...here's Sourcewatch...

The Washington Times is a newspaper owned by Reverend Sun Myung Moon's Unification Church, through its company News World Communications. The paper was first published on May 17, 1982. [1]

In January 2008, John Solomon was named Times executive editor, replacing the retiring Wesley Pruden.[2]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=14&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwj2gOyr3Z3SAhUq5YMKHSCGCTcQFghbMA0&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sourcewatch.org%2Findex.php%2FWashington_Times&usg=AFQjCNHh9eVvAq-gdS7ED9j-uVKA_0P6uQ

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can easily check and find the original sources for wiki.

Mr. Moon and other church leaders were unabashed about their ambitions for the newspaper. “We are going to make it so that no one can run for office in the United States without our permission,” Col. Bo Hi Pak, Mr. Moon’s top aide and the founding president of the Times, reportedly told conservative activist David Finzer in 1988.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwi5_uPB353SAhWD6YMKHf-nAFIQFggoMAI&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fworld%2Fasia_pacific%2Fsun-myung-moon-dies-at-92-washington-times-owner-led-the-unification-church%2F2012%2F09%2F02%2F001b747a-f531-11e1-aab7-f199a16396cf_story.html&usg=AFQjCNHIkklnZW9FsJzdQnPs1O6gCznMhA

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Top Intelligence Officials have cleared Tump campaign of contact with Russian spies?  How do you get that from the article. 

What I see is White House Chief of staff Reince Priebus saying that intelligence officials have assured the administration that none of Trump's aides have had contact with Russian spies.  That would be like me saying that police officers have assured me that I had nothing to do with the crime I might have committed.  Would be a lot more believable if it came from the Intelligence Officials, no?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one said they had contact with Russian spies.  His aides had contact with RUSSIA, no spies involved.  I'm am in no way saying that Trump knew of it, or ordered it.  But, it's pretty clear people on his team had contact with Russia.  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ashotep said:

Now which "intel officials" said this?

Taking Priebus', Spicer's or Conway's word is just as reliable as believing the head honcho El Trumo Rama Lama Ding Dong himself.

 

Edited by Avatar Samantha Ai
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Avatar Samantha Ai said:

Now which "intel officials" said this?

Taking Priebus', Spicer's or Conway's word is just as reliable as believing the head honcho El Trumo Rama Lama Ding Dong himself.

 

I see what you did there.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Agent0range said:

No one said they had contact with Russian spies.  His aides had contact with RUSSIA, no spies involved.  I'm am in no way saying that Trump knew of it, or ordered it.  But, it's pretty clear people on his team had contact with Russia.  

Yes they are. "Russian Intelligence" means Russian spies. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/us/politics/russia-intelligence-communications-trump.html?_r=0

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/14/trump-campaign-on-russian-intelligence.html

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, The Butler said:

Flynn had contact with an Ambassador.  That is not a spy.  The Administration had contacts with RUSSIANS.  Not people pretending to not be Russian.  They were Russians.  Not spies.  If you know someone works for the Russian government, they are not a spy.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Agent0range said:

Flynn had contact with an Ambassador.  That is not a spy.  The Administration had contacts with RUSSIANS.  Not people pretending to not be Russian.  They were Russians.  Not spies.  If you know someone works for the Russian government, they are not a spy.  

That has nothing to do with what you wrote and my reply.  You said 

1 hour ago, Agent0range said:

No one said they had contact with Russian spies.  His aides had contact with RUSSIA, no spies involved.  I'm am in no way saying that Trump knew of it, or ordered it.  But, it's pretty clear people on his team had contact with Russia.  

I quoted NYT and CNBC headlines saying exactly that.  I'm not making any claims to knowledge, or disputing anything.  

When they write "Russian Intelligence" they mean to imply Russian spies. If they meant random government officials, they wouldn't write "Russian Intelligence".  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Agent0range said:

No one said they had contact with Russian spies.  His aides had contact with RUSSIA, no spies involved.  I'm am in no way saying that Trump knew of it, or ordered it.  But, it's pretty clear people on his team had contact with Russia.  

 

How is it clear?  Not one source has spoken OTR or been identified.  If it's true then at least ONE would come forward, don't you think?  Just like Priebus' story being unconfirmed, so are all the reports of multiple contacts between Trump's team and the Russians.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Butler said:
 

From the NYT piece -  The officials interviewed in recent weeks said that, so far, they had seen no evidence of such cooperation.

What part of "no evidence" is confusing?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, and then said:

From the NYT piece -  The officials interviewed in recent weeks said that, so far, they had seen no evidence of such cooperation.

What part of "no evidence" is confusing?

What part of my posts is confusing?  

Edited by The Butler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems many on the left can't stand the fact we have a president that's not in the pockets of the Russians.  Looks like they would be happy he wasn't if they really cared about the US more than dividing this country.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, and then said:

From the NYT piece -  The officials interviewed in recent weeks said that, so far, they had seen no evidence of such cooperation.

What part of "no evidence" is confusing?

They want it to be true so bad they are willing to not read that part and the fact they don't name their source, any source.  At least Priebus is someone in the government coming forward.  Unlike the NYT's article. 

Edited by Ashotep
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, The Butler said:

What part of my posts is confusing?  

None, the import, and intent are clear.  When actual evidence is produced, I will give it its due consideration.  One point, members of any new administration have done what Flynn did.  It was not improper, let alone, illegal.  Hack pieces by the NYT and WaPo are so abundant that they are nothing but noise now.  The only people whose opinions need to be changed, ignore both of those outlets for "news".  They are basically "preaching to the choir".

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump had people in his campaign who had ties to Russia. During the campaign I'm sure he would have severed any ties to directly link him and Trump businesses with the communications that went on. So I doubt they will find that much on him directly during the campaign even if he was well aware of the acts in his favor during the campaign.

I think they should be taking a closer look at his ties to China business dealings and taxes as well. 

If there's nothing to hide, who cares if it's investigated. How does Trump feel he's so different than any other president under investigations or scrutiny of the press? What's he really hiding or not. He works for us now and owes us answers!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tell you what, China must be loving this US vs Russia game.  They also must be loving the UK dumping it's European trading partners.  I reckon that's a fact.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All Russian ambassadors (diplomatic corps) are spies, just as ours are.  Now as far as being in Putin's pocket, how and why?  Who here can honestly say that Trump is in Putin's pocket?  If anything Putin is in Trump's pocket.  You see the absurdity in that juxtaposition?  I doubt that either is in the others pocket.  That Trump wants to see if he can work with Putin is a good thing.  Does that mean we should expect to sing kumbaya with the Russians?  Not hardly.  Flynn was doing his job building contacts and I think he got into a Gen Haig complex and that wasn't going to work under Trump.  A lot ado about nothing...  But that's all the Left can do, is spit in the wind.  How complete is the fall when all you have now in Prog leadership are the Three Stooges (Schumer, Pelosi, Warren).  I would say they are showing their true colors as with all the Prog shills.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One day I'm going to come here and see all the people who say they 100% know the "facts" saying the exact same thing at the exact same time.  And then I'll strap on ice skates, and check out Lake Hell.  And I'll get there atop a flying pig.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.