This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

FBI Informant Stefan Halper Paid Over $1 Million By Obama Admin; Spied On Trump Aide After Election

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Read the article. Then consider, as I do, that neither of our two dominant political parties can be trusted.  We are led by thieves, liars, murderers, whore-mongers, and politicians who have sold their souls to the MIC.  It's time to wipe the slate clean.  

The democrats are as corrupt as the republicans.  For sure.




http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/49478.htm

View user profile
Wordslinger wrote:Read the article.  Then consider, as I do, that neither of our two dominant political parties can be trusted.  We are led by thieves, liars, murderers, whore-mongers, and politicians who have sold their souls to the MIC.  It's time to wipe the slate clean.  

The democrats are as corrupt as the republicans.  For sure.




http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/49478.htm
\

Hmmmfff. I've been saying that for years. What we need are term limits - if these scum weren't spending all their time raising money and working on reelection perhaps they would attend to business and not be so exposed to corruption.

View user profile
This is conspiracy nonsense from The Daily Caller and Tyler Durden at Zero Hedge. There's no "there" there. http://dailycaller.com/2018/05/20/stefan-halper-carter-page/

The fact that Halper got paid by the Department of Defense for research articles means nothing, lots of academics do that. He's just milking the DoD cow. So what, good for him.

How anyone can twist that into "...neither of our two dominant political parties can be trusted.  We are led by thieves, liars, murderers, whore-mongers, and politicians who have sold their souls to the MIC" is beyond me.

Go to the article and scroll down to the comments. Worthy of particular attention is the one by "Phillip Hoffman".

Very disappointing, Wordslinger. You just did SERIOUS damage to your credibility.

In this case, it ain't "words" you're slinging...   if you get my drift.

View user profile
I'm sorry, but if you're believing shit from Information Clearing House, based on stuff cooked up by Jacob Wohl, then I'm a little shocked to find this kind of stupidity in you.

Halper's a Republican from way back -- worked for Nixon and Ford, tried to dig up info on Carter for Reagan, advised H.W. Bush. And he didn't get paid off "from Obama" -- he was a paid consultant to the Pentagon's Office Of Net Assessment because he knows a lot about Russia and China. He's been getting payments for that since 2012... so, you think he's been spying on Trump for six years? They just started paying him early in case Trump would run for president? Very Happy And he was hardly "implanted," which would have been hard to do since he wasn't even part of the Trump campaign -- he just talked to a few Trump campaign members and became alarmed enough by what they said regarding Russia to go to the FBI with it.

The Republicans are desperately trying to tear down the FBI because they're getting the goods on Trump, and this horseshit is a desperate ploy to do that... and you're buying it? Seriously... something Jacob Wohl cooked up? You got any idea who that joker is? He's an alt-right loonietoon who spams Twitter with Trump kiss-assing, when he's not in court defending himself on fraud charges.

It's fine if you don't like either party -- I don't blame ya -- but don't start getting manipulated into absolute hogwash off conspiracy sites.

View user profile

Tyler Durden is a central character in the book FIGHT CLUB and the movie by the same name. Plot twist: Tyler Durden isn't real. Zero Hedge uses the name to mask their identities. Nothing at Zero Hedge is real, either.

View user profile
Deus X wrote:This is conspiracy nonsense from The Daily Caller and Tyler Durden at Zero Hedge. There's no "there" there. http://dailycaller.com/2018/05/20/stefan-halper-carter-page/

The fact that Halper got paid by the Department of Defense for research articles means nothing, lots of academics do that. He's just milking the DoD cow. So what, good for him.

How anyone can twist that into "...neither of our two dominant political parties can be trusted.  We are led by thieves, liars, murderers, whore-mongers, and politicians who have sold their souls to the MIC" is beyond me.

Go to the article and scroll down to the comments. Worthy of particular attention is the one by "Phillip Hoffman".

Very disappointing, Wordslinger. You just did SERIOUS damage to your credibility.

In this case, it ain't "words" you're slinging...   if you get my drift.

Today's Forever Wars started long ago and include Carter, Clinton and Obama administrations. During the Clinton-Trump campaigns, the DNC cheated to give everything to Hillary. The DNC still bars true progressives from party support -- including Bernie Sanders. The MIC doesn't care what party a legislator represents -- they buy both sides. The enormous and ever widening gap between the ultra rich and the rest of us grew under administrations owned by both parties.

Reality.

View user profile
Wordslinger wrote:
During the Clinton-Trump campaigns, the DNC cheated to give everything to Hillary.  The DNC still bars true progressives from party support -- including Bernie Sanders.

This bitter complaint is at the heart of just about everything Word seems to post these days and I, too, am disappointed in its destructiveness, since the only probable result will be the continued chewing away at the foundation of the liberal movement, along with the death of the Democratic party, and an easy victory for the Trumpists of the world.

View user profile
Fuck Bernie Sanders.

He isn't even a Democrat. He just lured people along with a bunch of nice-sounding ideas that he had no realistic plans to implement.

He wasn't cheated by anyone -- he just lost. Not as many people thought he was as good a candidate as Hillary. You can disagree with those people if you wish, but that doesn't many it "unfair" or that he got "cheated." We had primaries. He lost 'em.

I'd have voted for him over Trump, yeah, but honestly, Bernie doesn't understand economics or foreign policy much better than Trump does. And he would have gotten his ass kicked even worse because the RNC was sitting on a whole pile of weapons-grade intell about the sonofabitch, including video of him praising Castro and singing along to songs about murdering capitalists. When that came out, he'd have been toast.

So enough of the Bernie junk. I get it, some people really liked him. Some people really like Justin Bieber, too, but that doesn't mean he isn't junk.

View user profile
zsomething wrote:He wasn't cheated by anyone -- he just lost.   Not as many people thought he was as good a candidate as Hillary.  You can disagree with those people if you wish, but that doesn't many it "unfair" or that he got "cheated."   We had primaries.  He lost 'em.

And that's the simple but patently obvious reality in a nutshell. If the man had had something truly special to offer that the American people craved, no one and nothing could've kept him down.

View user profile
Wordslinger wrote:Today's Forever Wars started long ago and include Carter, Clinton and Obama administrations.  During the Clinton-Trump campaigns, the DNC cheated to give everything to Hillary.  The DNC still bars true progressives from party support -- including Bernie Sanders.  The MIC doesn't care what party a legislator represents -- they buy both sides.  The enormous and ever widening gap between the ultra rich and the rest of us grew under administrations owned by both parties.

While I don't disagree with the nano-kernels of truth in your above exercise in hyperbole, that's not the problem. It's your sources. Information Clearing House is rank conspiracy bullshit. With just a ten-minute search, you can trace many of the posts back to RT and Sputnik News, the worst kind of Russki propaganda.

Jesus, you're sitting at a computer hooked all the libraries of all the world and you link to this bullshit? C'mon Word, do a little homework.

View user profile
zsomething wrote:He wasn't cheated by anyone -- he just lost.   Not as many people thought he was as good a candidate as Hillary.  You can disagree with those people if you wish, but that doesn't many it "unfair" or that he got "cheated."   We had primaries.  He lost 'em.

Oh, Z, this is so sad:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/25/debbie-wasserman-schultz-booed-dnc-fbi-email-hack

http://www.newsweek.com/clinton-robbed-sanders-dnc-brazile-699421

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/11/14/16640082/donna-brazile-warren-bernie-sanders-democratic-primary-rigged

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/clinton-brazile-hacks-2016-215774

https://newrepublic.com/minutes/139425/clinton-campaign-going-admit-badly-screwed-up

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/11/donna-brazile-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders

zsomething wrote:And he would have gotten his ass kicked even worse because the RNC was sitting on a whole pile of weapons-grade intell about the sonofabitch, including video of him praising Castro and singing along to songs about murdering capitalists.  When that came out, he'd have been toast.

First off, post some links to that scurrilous nonsense and apply the same standards of veracity you do to Word's stuff above.

Secondly, that's the same shit they said about Trump's Access Hollywood tape. How'd that work out?

View user profile

The Democrats were trying to prevent a disaster and going with their strongest candidate (and, yes, she was - Sanders likely would have been beaten even worse... he was VERY popular with a small group, but unpopular with the rest). In fact, the Dems were going with their only Democrat candidate, because Bernie was only a Dem to get on the debates and get access to the mailing lists... without which he'd have gotten nowhere.

Just because the DNC was favoring one over the other didn't stop anyone from voting for Bernie if they wanted to. But... they didn't, not in sufficient numbers. The DNC didn't influence my vote any -- Bernie did, when he put forward things like "a million young people will march on Washington and demand it!" as a plan. Sorry, but that's wishin' 'n' hopin'... it ain't a plan or a strategy. He was like a talking doll -- there were about three things he knew how to say and he just kept repeating them. He even repeated the same damn joke ("Yuge!") over and over. I didn't get the appeal of him any more than I did Trump. When Hillary was asked questions, she gave details, and she asked more questions to narrow things down. Love her or hate her, she was a policy wonk. Bernie was not. I don't blame the DNC for wanting to push her more than they did him. That's not "rigging" -- that's going with your strength. Was some of it on the dirty side? Probably, but politics isn't Leave It To Beaver. Bernie played nasty, too. None of it's nice, but it's not surprising, either.



First off, post some links to that scurrilous nonsense and apply the same standards of veracity you do to Word's stuff above.

Secondly, that's the same shit they said about Trump's Access Hollywood tape. How'd that work out?



http://www.wnd.com/2016/01/is-bernie-sanders-a-communist/

That second link is weaker than some I originally read, which had placed Bernie at meetings were those songs were being sung, and even had him writing reports of the meetings. Now, I'm not saying that's not mostly bullshit, and I have no doubt it's ginned-up -- most political hit-jobs are -- but the Republicans had a LOT of it, and the public would buy most of it. I can't find the link anymore, but there was a Bernie supporter who gave up on him after getting a peek at some of the stuff the Republicans had on Bernie, because they knew he'd be doomed. I get that people liked him, because he said nice ideas (even though he didn't have realistic plans to implement them), but there were a lot of exploitable weaknesses Bernie had. Ever notice that Republicans kept trying to prop him up in the primaries, while they were tearing down Clinton? They were trying to pick their opposition... gaming things like the Russians did for Trump.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/04/polls_say_bernie_is_more_electable_than_hillary_don_t_believe_them.html


http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/02/bernie_sanders_radical_past_would_haunt_him_in_a_general_election.html

http://www.thepeoplesview.net/main/2016/5/19/this-ends-now-the-bernie-sanders-opposition-research-the-media-refuses-to-release

I'm not gonna re-fight the primaries, because there's no point - that's all in the Harry Turtledove realm now, alternative-history fiction. And I know you hate Hillary 'cuz you've got your weird wounded personal thing about women in general. And, yeah, it's always possible that Bernie could have gotten the same kind of pass that Trump got for the Access Hollywood tape -- who knows? It's all speculation and theorizing, and everybody can think as they please; none of us can know how things would've turned out, anyway. But, as for me, I've got no faith in Bernie Sanders. Didn't then, don't now, and I think if he had won he'd be a lousy president. Not as lousy as Trump, of course -- I'm not sure anyone would be -- but I don't think we missed out on anything good by swiping left on that one-note stuck-in-a-loop nitwit.

Everyone's opinion can vary on that, and that's fine. All I'm saying is, he's a Michael Moore to me -- I share a lot of his opinions, but I still think he's an asshole and I don't trust him. Just having the same goals doesn't mean he's somebody I'd pick to lead us to 'em.

View user profile

World Net Daily! It's comforting to know where you get your ideas.

Let's see what the Southern Poverty Law Center has to say about them:

WorldNetDaily is an online publication founded and run by Joseph Farah that claims to pursue truth, justice and liberty. But in fact, its pages are devoted to manipulative fear-mongering and outright fabrications designed to further the paranoid, gay-hating, conspiratorial and apocalyptic visions of Farah and his hand-picked contributors from the fringes of the far-right and fundamentalist worlds.

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/group/worldnetdaily

View user profile
Deus X wrote:

World Net Daily! It's comforting to know where you get your ideas.

Let's see what the Southern Poverty Law Center has to say about them:

WorldNetDaily is an online publication founded and run by Joseph Farah that claims to pursue truth, justice and liberty. But in fact, its pages are devoted to manipulative fear-mongering and outright fabrications designed to further the paranoid, gay-hating, conspiratorial and apocalyptic visions of Farah and his hand-picked contributors from the fringes of the far-right and fundamentalist worlds.

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/group/worldnetdaily


I fucking repeat, because you don't seem very good at reading:

Now, I'm not saying that's not mostly bullshit, and I have no doubt it's ginned-up -- most political hit-jobs are -- but the Republicans had a LOT of it, and the public would buy most of it.

I never said all the stuff Republicans would have had in their dossier on Bernie was all true -- I'm just saying the public would believe a lot of it. Witness WordSlinger, who's usually pretty sharp, believing the bullshit this thread is based on. I know WorldNetDaily is shit, but I also know Information Clearing House is shit, Brietbart is shit, Fox News is shit, Hannity is shit, InfoWars is shit... but we all know people who believe 'em as gospel, don't we? I've stopped counting the number of times I've had to dubunk stuff like "Fast & Furious" or "Uranium One" or "we-need-our-AR's-to-fight-off-the-gubm'nt!" horseshit around here, but people still keep clinging to that garbage. It's not that I think WorldNet Daily is a reliable source -- I don't -- but just that it's out there and people would believe it. Just like a lot of people believed Hillary was a drunk, or that she was going to drop dead any minute, or whatever other load o' bullcookies they were spreading about her at any given moment.

Do I think that Bernie sang along with "kill the capitalist" songs? No. Do I think that a lot of the public would believe he did when Republicans sent out ginned-up "evidence." Yeah. The same way a lot of 'em bought that he was a misogynist because of some juvenile shit he wrote in school that looked "pro-rape." Of course he isn't, but would people build stuff out of it? Yeah. And a lot of the public would buy it, the same way they bought "Trump is a successful businessman."

This isn't me trying to prove the veracity of any of the anti-Bernie material. It's just me proving that it was out there. And it was, and they would have used it. Would it have been effective? To a degree, most certainly. To what degree, well, that puts us back to the Harry Turtledove stuff again, which is pointless to argue because nobody knows.

View user profile
zsomething wrote:
Deus X wrote:

World Net Daily! It's comforting to know where you get your ideas.

Let's see what the Southern Poverty Law Center has to say about them:

WorldNetDaily is an online publication founded and run by Joseph Farah that claims to pursue truth, justice and liberty. But in fact, its pages are devoted to manipulative fear-mongering and outright fabrications designed to further the paranoid, gay-hating, conspiratorial and apocalyptic visions of Farah and his hand-picked contributors from the fringes of the far-right and fundamentalist worlds.

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/group/worldnetdaily


I fucking repeat, because you don't seem very good at reading:

Now, I'm not saying that's not mostly bullshit, and I have no doubt it's ginned-up -- most political hit-jobs are -- but the Republicans had a LOT of it, and the public would buy most of it.

I never said all the stuff Republicans would have had in their dossier on Bernie was all true -- I'm just saying the public would believe a lot of it.    Witness WordSlinger, who's usually pretty sharp, believing the bullshit this thread is based on.  I know WorldNetDaily is shit, but I also know Information Clearing House is shit, Brietbart is shit, Fox News is shit, Hannity is shit, InfoWars is shit... but we all know people who believe 'em as gospel, don't we?  I've stopped counting the number of times I've had to dubunk stuff like "Fast & Furious" or "Uranium One" or "we-need-our-AR's-to-fight-off-the-gubm'nt!" horseshit around here, but people still keep clinging to that garbage.   It's not that I think WorldNet Daily is a reliable source -- I don't -- but just that it's out there and people would believe it.  Just like a lot of people believed Hillary was a drunk, or that she was going to drop dead any minute, or whatever other load o' bullcookies they were spreading about her at any given moment.

Do I think that Bernie sang along with "kill the capitalist" songs?  No.  Do I think that a lot of the public would believe he did when Republicans sent out ginned-up "evidence."  Yeah.  The same way a lot of 'em bought that he was a misogynist because of some juvenile shit he wrote in school that looked "pro-rape."   Of course he isn't, but would people build stuff out of it?  Yeah.  And a lot of the public would buy it, the same way they bought "Trump is a successful businessman."  

This isn't me trying to prove the veracity of any of the anti-Bernie material.  It's just me proving that it was out there.  And it was, and they would have used it.   Would it have been effective?   To a degree, most certainly.  To what degree, well, that puts us back to the Harry Turtledove stuff again, which is pointless to argue because nobody knows.

Oh, Jesus, take a breath. I was just trying to get you wound up but you're making it too easy.

View user profile
Deus X wrote:

Oh, Jesus, take a breath. I was just trying to get you wound up but you're making it too easy.


You forget, I like writing long things. Smile Ranting's a hobby. You'll have to find a different briar patch if you're wanting to B'rer Fox me.

View user profile
zsomething wrote:
You forget, I like writing long things.  

Oh? I hadn't noticed.

Wintergreen determined the outcome by throwing all communications from General Peckem into the wastebasket. He found them too prolix. General Dreedle's views, expressed in less pretentious literary style, pleased ex-P.F.C. Wintergreen and were sped along by him in zealous observance of regulations.

I don't think I need to show the source of that gem.

View user profile
Deus X wrote:
zsomething wrote:
You forget, I like writing long things.  

Oh? I hadn't noticed.

Wintergreen determined the outcome by throwing all communications from General Peckem into the wastebasket. He found them too prolix. General Dreedle's views, expressed in less pretentious literary style, pleased ex-P.F.C. Wintergreen and were sped along by him in zealous observance of regulations.

I don't think I need to show the source of that gem.

Here's a better one:

“It was miraculous. It was almost no trick at all, he saw, to turn vice into virtue and slander into truth, impotence into abstinence, arrogance into humility, plunder into philanthropy, thievery into honor, blasphemy into wisdom, brutality into patriotism, and sadism into justice. Anybody could do it; it required no brains at all. It merely required no character.”
― Joseph Heller, Catch 22

View user profile

Sponsored content


Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum