Another delusion dispelled
POSTED BY: WISHIMAY
UPDATED: Monday, December 9, 2019 09:45
VIEWED: 5551
PAGE 1 of 6
https://frontier.yahoo.com/news/huge-blow-trump-doj-watchdog-202544788
.html
The Justice Department's inspector general found no evidence to support President Donald Trump's claim that the FBI inserted spies in his 2016 presidential campaign, The New York Times reported.
Trump has repeatedly and baselessly alleged that the FBI inserted covert operators in his campaign.
He also alleged, without evidence, that former President Barack Obama had intelligence officials tap his phones, a claim the IG's report is also expected to undercut.
Rethuglicans constantly use conspiracy theories and paranoia to deflect reality that they don't like.
They are all about making up non-existent, delusional schemes, i.e. Hillary and the Uranium, Pizzagate, Soros's paid protesters, Bowling Green massacre, the "Deep State", the MAINSTREAM media, the FBI...
Then when the delusion gets proven to be a delusion they just make up another one.
Why hold anyone in your party accountable for ANYTHING, when you can just pretend they are being persecuted and never have to deal with ANYTHING....
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"sources told The Times"
"a claim the IG's report is also expected to undercut."
"according to the Post"
Only one instance of ANON, speculation, and attempted preemptive passing of the buck if this blows up in their faces in the article Wishy linked.
But wait... There's more.
Here's the articles from the Times and the WaPo that are referenced for the story. (How outright plagiarism passes as "journalism" these days is still a mystery to me, but I guess when you're in the business of making shit up nobody cares about copyright anymore.)
Let's just jump right into it...
Times Article: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/27/us/politics/fbi-trump-campaign-insp
ector-general.html?smtyp=cur&smid=tw-nytimes
"a highly anticipated inspector general’s report is expected to find."
"people familiar with a draft of the inspector general’s report said."
"is expected to be a key finding in his highly anticipated report"
"according to people familiar with a draft of the report"
"one of the people said."
"A spokeswoman for Mr. Horowitz declined to comment."
"The people familiar with the inquiry cautioned that the draft report was not final."
"The New York Times has not reviewed the draft"
"Mr. Horowitz’s findings are also said to show"
"according to a person familiar with the offer."
"the people familiar with the draft report said"
"former officials said."
"the people said."
"But it is not clear whether Mr. Horowitz uncovered any such instances."
"the people familiar with the draft report said."
"the people familiar with the draft report said."
Yes. This exact same phrasing is used in two paragraphs at this point. Nobody reads this far down, so why bother with mistakes like these?
The WaPo Article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/inspector-generals-re
port-on-fbis-russia-probe-to-be-delivered-dec-9/2019/11/21/6d6d789e-0c70-11ea-8397-a955cd542d00_story.html
"according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter."
"according to the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss material that has not yet been made public."
"They declined to identify the lawyer."
"people familiar with the matter said."
"two U.S. officials said."
"they said."
"the officials said."
"people familiar with the matter said."
"A spokeswoman for the inspector general declined to comment, as did a spokeswoman for the FBI. A spokeswoman for the Justice Department did not respond to a request for comment."
"according to people familiar with the matter."
Hmmmmmmmmm....
"They" say a lot. Don't "they"?
You know what else the media likes to do? Lie by structure.
Here are two of the last three paragraphs in the WaPo article that Wishy didn't read, and apparently the "journalist" at yahoo news never got around to before writing their stunning bombshell...
Quote:
Conservatives have alleged that a medley of wrongdoing occurred during the investigation, which was eventually taken over by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, and they are likely to seize on any criticism that Horowitz directs at those involved in the probe. Some Trump supporters have referred to the investigation as an attempted “coup.”
Democrats, meanwhile, are hopeful Horowitz will disprove various conspiracy theories that have been offered about the case and refute Trump’s assertion that Mueller’s probe was a “witch hunt” tainted by political bias against the president.
Though it is quite obvious the bias that WaPo injects in these paragraphs and how they want you to believe their narrative, it is quite clear that nobody has read the re
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You don't have anywhere to go for Thanksgiving, DO YOU?
Wonder why that is...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by WISHIMAY:
You don't have anywhere to go for Thanksgiving, DO YOU?
Wonder why that is...
Because he's happy where he is. Unlike you?
Jeez TWITCHY, someone makes a point that YOU CAN'T ANSWER, and instead of acknowledging the weakness of your post and maybe quite possibly learning just the teensiest little bit from it (like, maybe noticing that these are all "anon" sources) you go for the cheapest shot possible.
SIX is ten times a better person than you are, no matter how hard you virtue signal. Learn to be human, willya?
Oh and BTW - Happy Thanksgiving.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
You idiots have been oppressing the entire sexual spectrum as long as you have existed. I can't wait for the day your kind is dead - WISHIMAY
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Fixed it for
Originally posted by WISHIMAY:
strawman
strawman
strawman
strawman
and more strawman
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
You idiots have been oppressing the entire sexual spectrum as long as you have existed. I can't wait for the day your kind is dead - WISHIMAY
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
"sources told The Times"
"a claim the IG's report is also expected to undercut."
"according to the Post"
Only one instance of ANON, speculation, and attempted preemptive passing of the buck if this blows up in their faces in the article Wishy linked.
But wait... There's more.
Here's the articles from the Times and the WaPo that are referenced for the story. (How outright plagiarism passes as "journalism" these days is still a mystery to me, but I guess when you're in the business of making shit up nobody cares about copyright anymore.)
Let's just jump right into it...
Times Article: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/27/us/politics/fbi-trump-campaign-insp
ector-general.html?smtyp=cur&smid=tw-nytimes
"a highly anticipated inspector general’s report is expected to find."
"people familiar with a draft of the inspector general’s report said."
"is expected to be a key finding in his highly anticipated report"
"according to people familiar with a draft of the report"
"one of the people said."
"A spokeswoman for Mr. Horowitz declined to comment."
"The people familiar with the inquiry cautioned that the draft report was not final."
"The New York Times has not reviewed the draft"
"Mr. Horowitz’s findings are also said to show"
"according to a person familiar with the offer."
"the people familiar with the draft report said"
"former officials said."
"the people said."
"But it is not clear whether Mr. Horowitz uncovered any such instances."
"the people familiar with the draft report said."
"the people familiar with the draft report said."
Yes. This exact same phrasing is used in two paragraphs at this point. Nobody reads this far down, so why bother with mistakes like these?
The WaPo Article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/inspector-generals-re
port-on-fbis-russia-probe-to-be-delivered-dec-9/2019/11/21/6d6d789e-0c70-11ea-8397-a955cd542d00_story.html
"according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter."
"according to the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss material that has not yet been made public."
"They declined to identify the lawyer."
"people familiar with the matter said."
"two U.S. officials said."
"they said."
"the officials said."
"people familiar with the matter said."
"A spokeswoman for the inspector general declined to comment, as did a spokeswoman for the FBI. A spokeswoman for the Justice Department did not respond to a request for comment."
"according to people familiar with the matter."
Journalists protecting their sources is as old as journalism. It's amazing how much basic media understanding you are unaware of. People who use their name get fired or worse - do you use your name on this forum? No? How come? You have a lot less to loose than someone with a job and a life.
Whenever I see one of you ladies bitch about "ANON" I think about how often you use "Deep State" - the worst, baddest use of any anon source out there. The Deep State is trying to bring down the president! Whereas some anon person leaked their knowledge of some of the tone of the IG report.
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Here are two of the last three paragraphs in the WaPo article that Wishy didn't read, and apparently the "journalist" at yahoo news never got around to before writing their stunning bombshell...Quote:
Conservatives have alleged that a medley of wrongdoing occurred during the investigation, which was eventually taken over by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, and they are likely to seize on any criticism that Horowitz dNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 6STRINGJACK:Quote:
Conservatives have alleged that a medley of wrongdoing occurred during the investigation, which was eventually taken over by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, and they are likely to seize on any criticism that Horowitz directs at those involved in the probe. Some Trump supporters have referred to the investigation as an attempted “coup.”
Democrats, meanwhile, are hopeful Horowitz will disprove various conspiracy theories that have been offered about the case and refute Trump’s assertion that Mueller’s probe was a “witch hunt” tainted by political bias against the president.
Though it is quite obvious the bias that WaPo injects in these paragraphs and how they want you to believe their narrative, it is quite clear that nobody has read the report at all except for some possibly fictionalized people without names, and the WaPo does finally get around to letting anybody who actually reads that far down know that basically...
NOBODY KNOWS.
Quote:
Originally posted by captaincrunch:
How do you know those aren't real people and haven't read or contributed to the report?
I don't know for sure. Hence why I said "it is quite clear that nobody has read the report at all except for some possibly fictionalized people without names". It's 50/50 at this point, yet the articles as structured are designed to make it sound as if it weren't.
You want proof of that?
OK
It fooled Wishy. Look at the thread title that you're posting on, and Wishy's OP here.
The only thing that is 100% known and verifiable, through their own admission, is that nobody who wrote any of these three articles has read the report.
Quote:
And where were the problems in those 2 paragraphs? People have said it wasn't final... seems WP is covering all bases - it's called Reporting.
In all three articles presented they were the only two paragraphs that even came close to presenting the truth and the facts as they are known right now. That's where the positives of all three articles and the "journalists" who wrote them ends.
The problem with them is two fold:
1. Structure. They were ONLY said at the bottom of one out of three of the articles. Almost nobody reads the entire article these days on any given subject.
You want proof of that?
OK
Look at the thread title to the post you made and the OP that Wishy presented here.
2. Framing. Even though they were the only parts of all three articles that had verifiable truth in them, they were undeniably written in a way to lead you to a conclusion.
First Paragraph:
"Conservative's have alleged"
Coup is put in quotation marks. "Coup"
Intended Takeaway from First Paragraph:
There is no "Coup". Conservatives are full of shit.
Second Paragraph:
"Democrats, meanwhile, are hopeful Horowitz will disprove various conspiracy theories"
"refute Trump’s assertion that Mueller’s probe was a “witch hunt”"
Intended Take Away from Second Paragraph:
Again with the quotation marks, this time on "witch hunt".
Why not alleged conspiracy theories? Why no quotations around "conspiracy theories"?
Because there is no witch hunt and anyone saying otherwise is a conspiracy theorist.
Why is that?
BECAUSE WE SAID SO.
Certainly not because we have actually read a document that proves otherwise. The one which we have admitted, buried deep in the middle of all three articles, that nobody working at our companies has been privy to or has actually read yet.
Go ahead and fight me on this all you want.
But if your next reply isn't "You're right. The illusion has not been dispelled and Wishy's conclusions in her OP and thread title have not been proven." then the one who
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
SIX is ten times a better person than you are, no matter how hard you virtue signal.
BAHAAAHAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA. I don't think you could even get HIM to buy that one!
You might get him off though... if you keep all this sucking up. Little bit harder ego stroking!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Maybe you should rid yourself of the delusion that you come across as a reasonable, sane person. Your constant personal attacks and calls to "eradicate" large swaths of the world's peoples (yanno, "brown people", "red people", "black people") make you an obvious nut-case with a bad case of anger mismanagemnt.
SIX is ten times a better person than you are, no matter how hard you virtue signal. - SIGNY
BAHAAAHAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA. I don't think you could even get HIM to buy that one!- TWITCHY
I have no faith in Horowitz. I think he's going to soft-pedal everything that the FBI did that was illegal, just like the FBI soft-pedaled Hillary's erasing 33,000 subpoenaed emails.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
You idiots have been oppressing the entire sexual spectrum as long as you have existed. I can't wait for the day your kind is dead - WISHIMAY
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Your constant personal attacks and calls to "eradicate" large swaths of the world's peoples (yanno, "brown people", "red people", "black people") make you an obvious nut-case with a bad case of anger mismanagemnt.
I don't wanna eradicate people by color...YOU are the one obsessed with color. You've been blabbing about "brown people" from the start. Suspiciously quiet about black people though. Don't wanna say anything lest you say too much and sound like a hate freak??
*cough nazi lover *coughI just want all fascists to drink some nice tainted Kool-aid... I don't give a shit what color they are. I am ALLLL ABOUT equality for everyone that isn't a fascist.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME