BillsFanNC Posted June 8 Author Posted June 8 The reason Clapper can still stand behind the letter he signed is clear to anyone who actually read it. The letter says directly, plainly and clearly that... THEY HAD NO DIRECT EVIDENCE that the laptop contents were part of a Russian disinformation operation. Instead they say that their experience tells them that it might be. And that was plenty good enough for Politico and the rest to run with the false headline that the laptop IS Russian disinformation. See how that works?
Doc Posted June 8 Posted June 8 3 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: The reason Clapper can still stand behind the letter he signed is clear to anyone who actually read it. The letter says directly, plainly and clearly that... THEY HAD NO DIRECT EVIDENCE that the laptop contents were part of a Russian disinformation operation. Instead they say that their experience tells them that it might be. And that was plenty good enough for Politico and the rest to run with the false headline that the laptop IS Russian disinformation. See how that works? Of course he did. He's a clown.
BillsFanNC Posted June 8 Author Posted June 8 3 minutes ago, Doc said: Of course he did. He's a clown. Indeed he is. But he and the rest left themselves an out. "The letter clearly said that we had no direct evidence and that we were only going with our experience and intuition that it might be Russian disinformation. It's not our fault that the entire media misled the country by not accurately reporting what we signed our names to...." I
Doc Posted June 8 Posted June 8 3 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: Indeed he is. But he and the rest left themselves an out. "The letter clearly said that we had no direct evidence and that we were only going with our experience and intuition that it might be Russian disinformation. It's not our fault that the entire media misled the country by not accurately reporting what we signed our names to...." Yup. But if they had no evidence, they had no business signing onto a letter that influenced the election. 1
BillsFanNC Posted June 8 Author Posted June 8 2 minutes ago, Doc said: Yup. But if they had no evidence, they had no business signing onto a letter that influenced the election. They'll keep on doing it until the IC as we know it is smashed into 1000 pieces. The good thing is that half or more of the country now knows to dismiss reporting based on IC sources immediately without a moments pause.
BillsFanNC Posted October 30 Author Posted October 30 Facebook was looking to earn favors with the Biden-Harris regime when they censored the Hunter Biden laptop story. I've just obtained the full 82-paged report that the Judiciary Committee is about to release. "Obviously, our calls on this could colour the way an incoming Biden administration views us more than almost anything else..." said Faecbook's then- Vice President of Global Affairs Nick Glegg in an internal message. One Microsoft employee said the, "FBI tipped us all off last week that this Burisma story was likely to emerge." This happened on October 14, 2020. That's the same day The New York Post released the story.
Recommended Posts