Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
6 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

You, who know all, having applied your decoding stone to the Q poop, should be very familiar with this reckless behavior: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/09/us/politics/michael-flynn.html

 

[I can't wait for the cackle in response - hah! NY Times!!!! Not as reliable as some anonymous creep in the Philippines!!!!]

 

But as a civilian, he founded a consulting firm, Flynn Intel Group, that attracted high-paying clients. In a decision that appalled some friends, he agreed to give a speech in 2015 to RT, Russia’s state-controlled television network, for about $45,000. He was seated at the head table next to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.

 

The next year, he pulled in at least $1.8 million from private intelligence and security services, consulting and speeches. About $530,000 came for work to discredit an enemy of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey. Mr. Flynn did not register with the Justice Department as a foreign agent, as required under lobbying disclosure laws, until the following spring when he was under federal scrutiny.

 

So... was he reckless when he sought DIA approval for the RT/Putin dinner? A dinner traditionally attended by members of the intel community? Or was asking for, and receiving, permission "reckless"? These are things you would know if you bothered to shut your pie hole and read the material rather than invent positions which are fiction. You do it in your responses to other posters and you're doing it here. 

 

As for Turkey and FARA -- it was, and has been proven to be, an intelligence operation also approved by the DIA. Forget the fact that his FARA paperwork was found to be in order (per last week's releases which you're ignoring to cite a nearly half a year old article). There was no illegality there, and operating FIG in the manner he was was not reckless but bait. 

 

So, you're wrong. Again. SHOCKER! :lol:  

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

So... was he reckless when he sought DIA approval for the RT/Putin dinner? A dinner traditionally attended by members of the intel community? Or was asking for, and receiving, permission "reckless"? These are things you would know if you bothered to shut your pie hole and read the material rather than invent positions which are fiction. You do it in your responses to other posters and you're doing it here. 

 

As for Turkey and FARA -- it was, and has been proven to be, an intelligence operation also approved by the DIA. Forget the fact that his FARA paperwork was found to be in order (per last week's releases which you're ignoring to cite a nearly half a year old article). There was no illegality there, and operating FIG in the manner he was was not reckless but bait. 

 

So, you're wrong. Again. SHOCKER! :lol:  

You'd think after taking so many bats to the head that the seal would die but that dumb MFer just keeps bleating.  lol

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

tl;dr: Russian intelligence said Hillary was trying to stir up suspicions that Russia was colluding with Trump.

 

Let's factor that out: Russian intelligence = Putin approved report.

So:

Putin says Hillary trying to stir up unwarranted suspicions that Putin is colluding with Trump.

And there's your bombshell. Don't worry, pick it up, it won't hurt you; it's a dud.

Edited by The Frankish Reich
Posted
3 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

tl;dr: Russian intelligence said Hillary was trying to stir up suspicions that Russia was colluding with Trump.

 

Nice try.  Radcliffe literally just said the exact opposite thing.  I wonder who to believe?

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
Just now, Alaska Darin said:

Yup.

Well then you should know.

In general, you have a piece of intel

It could be the real deal; stuff another government prepared for their own purposes. It could be disinformation, created knowing that someone else will get it.

The only way you know for sure is to assess whether they know that a source (or database) has been compromised.

It's an educated guess. It's not bible truth.

Posted
6 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Well then you should know.

In general, you have a piece of intel

It could be the real deal; stuff another government prepared for their own purposes. It could be disinformation, created knowing that someone else will get it.

The only way you know for sure is to assess whether they know that a source (or database) has been compromised.

It's an educated guess. It's not bible truth.

Dude...it's THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE.  Do you think he throws the intel community under the bus to the f**** SENATE without prejudice?

 

Put down the shovel before you dig the hole any deeper.

 

  • Haha (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
10 minutes ago, Alaska Darin said:

It's not hard to believe. There are literally Americans who think we can pull off socialism. 

 

Why not?  After all it's never really been implemented properly, so wouldn't the US with all its capabilities be the best one to pull it off?

2 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Well then you should know.

In general, you have a piece of intel

It could be the real deal; stuff another government prepared for their own purposes. It could be disinformation, created knowing that someone else will get it.

The only way you know for sure is to assess whether they know that a source (or database) has been compromised.

It's an educated guess. It's not bible truth.

 

NOW, you choose to question what the Intel Community has to say?

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
29 minutes ago, Alaska Darin said:

 

Nice try.  Radcliffe literally just said the exact opposite thing.  I wonder who to believe?

 

Well, you clearly can't believe the DNI. He's hand-picked, you know.

  • Haha (+1) 2
Posted
1 minute ago, Koko78 said:

 

Well, you clearly can't believe the DNI. He's hand-picked, you know.

Unless he/she/it/they are hand picked by a lib.  Then he/she/it/they are amazing and totes transparent.

Posted
40 minutes ago, Alaska Darin said:

Dude...it's THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE.  Do you think he throws the intel community under the bus to the f**** SENATE without prejudice?

 

Put down the shovel before you dig the hole any deeper.

 

No, I'm saying that quoting RUSSIAN intelligence on what an American presidential campaign is doing isn't exactly proof that the intel is correct.

The US Intelligence community has been clear: Russia interfered with the election to assist the Trump campaign.

And Don Jr. colluded with Russian intelligence; he appears to have escaped prosecution because Mueller found that he was too stupid to realize that a meeting with an attorney about "Russian adoptions" was really a meeting with a Russian spy.

Posted
1 hour ago, GG said:

 

Why not?  After all it's never really been implemented properly, so wouldn't the US with all its capabilities be the best one to pull it off?

We have the capabilities due to not being socialist- the fact you realize we are the best but  missed the reason shows why arguing with you is pointless.

Posted
3 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

No, I'm saying that quoting RUSSIAN intelligence on what an American presidential campaign is doing isn't exactly proof that the intel is correct.

 


You’re leaving out the part where IT ACTUALLY HAPPENED EXACTLY AS THEY SAID. You can’t help but to display how stupid of a person you are with each attempt to avoid the obvious solution: educate yourself on the actual facts of the matter before opining on them. 
 

:lol: 

Posted
5 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:


You’re leaving out the part where IT ACTUALLY HAPPENED EXACTLY AS THEY SAID. You can’t help but to display how stupid of a person you are with each attempt to avoid the obvious solution: educate yourself on the actual facts of the matter before opining on them. 
 

:lol: 

Just hoping you enjoyed watching Q+ tonight (isn't that what you guys call him? See, I've been studying you like an anthropologist studies a New Guinean cargo cult).

Such mastery of the facts, of the art of debate.

Just the kind of man to save us all.

×
×
  • Create New...