The_Noble_Cause wrote:Monker wrote:Well, that's something I care nothing about.
You don't care that America's biggest papers of record are churning out spurious BS?
Nope. I don't read them.
But, as I said, at least they DO recant things. That shows they do care.
Monker wrote:After Trump's Tweet about Obama tapping his wires, FF and KC went on post after trying to "prove" that it was true.
So what? The Kennedys wiretapped enemies and Martin Luther King. FDR wiretapped. Why is this out of the realm of possibility? Why are Democrats, like YOU, now trying to stifle free thought and viewpoints?[/quote]
That is such a childish thing to say. Just because somebody got away with it doesn't make it any less serious.
The laws changed after Watergate. Prior to that, it was probably legal. Trump accused Obama of a felony. That is a big del.
Monker wrote:Even to the point where they accused the CIA of planting false evidence of a Russia connection in server logs.Again, entirely plausible. Cyber experts like Jeffrey Carr have poked holes all over the official hacking narrative.
It's fantasy. You ask for evidence and links for other things. Why are you not demanding evidence of this? Just because the CIA has the capability to do this does not mean they did. It is irresponsible to put forth such a weak link to create such a chain of bullshit.
Monker wrote:Fox did a story that Obama asked Britain's version of the NSA to tap Trump's wires. All of this based on a story in BreitBart of invented BS of a connect the dots conspiracy theory.
The Britain story came from Fox's Judge Napolitano, who has been a lonely voice on civil liberties during both the Bush and Obama years. He's great and he, too, is entitled to his pov.
Napolitano has been proved wrong on so many things that it is irresponsible to believe anything that he says. He was also the guy who said the FBI was furious about not recommending charges and half the agents were going to quit...a bunch of bullshit.
He went on the Daily Show and told Jon Stewart that if Lincoln had purchased the slaves instead of going to war that it would have saved thousands of lives and all the money we spent on the war. JON STEWART knew that Lincoln HAD offered to purchase the slaves but the states did not want to do it. Naplitano didn't know what he was talking about and Jon Stewart did.
Napolitano likes to come off as somebody who is an expert on everything but he's not...and this is thing with cooperating with Brittain is just another example.
[/quote]Monker wrote:Has BreitBart recanted that story? That is now a story that NOBODY believes. It is a story that has had INTERNATIONAL reponses from Britain. It is a story that ended up with the current President accusing the previous President of a felony. It is a story that ended up broadening federal investigations...spendint more taxpayer money and wasting the time of congress and the FBI.
Where's the link? Do you have any proof that Breitbart posited this story as cold hard fact? The most prominent version of the wiretapping story I read on Breitbart came from Mark Levin - a radio host, not a journalist.
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/03/ ... ng-claims/
Levin is the "source" but the chief editer of BreitBart WROTE THE STORY.