Reply With Quote
Another "fake quote" that captured your true sentiment.
I didn't even remember which re did that, tbh. You're just not important like that. And
Another "fake quote" that captured your true sentiment.
It's been established that you cannot do anything with the number; and now you're just crying that I won't go into the weeds with you.
Prediction: You'll continue to butt post about this, nonetheless.
You never had the number.
You made up the trillion dollar figure.
he is also yet to tell us what mystery organization snopes is a front group for
Oh, you're under the impression that the CIA doesn't have even a trillion at stake?
OK, that's your claim.
How does the CIA have a trillion dollars "at stake"?
Just cos the chumpettes won't call you out, doesn't mean you're not making yourself look supremely stupid right now.
derp's entire shtick is revealed truth
"i just know, bro"
ijustknowbro.com/redpillJust cos the chumpettes won't call you out, doesn't mean you're not making yourself look supremely stupid right now.
I have not advocated for them once in this thread, tbh... the times I've visited their site, the sources looked good to me... can you point at some instances that you feel they were not?
This whole thread seems to want to sow distrust of Snopes based on the claim they're a CIA front. The problem is that there's no evidence to substantiate it.
I'm not going to ask you to provide that evidence, it's not your claim. But you evidently seem to think there's some validity to it, and I'm asking what makes you think so?
to quote what chinook once told me, you're trying to pry a manhole with a toothpick
what's wrong with that?
Why would any of that reduce my trust on Snopes' content?
I have no beef with Spurtacular, tbh... or anybody really... not once I told him he was 'wrong' in this thread...
Everybody got their reasons, and the extent of my curiosity is what are those reasons, or better yet, what drive them... nobody has to answer...
i'm not saying you have beef with him (or that you should)... but like you said, you are asking for reasons, and spurt is a guy who has never given reasons for any of his convictions or claims in the past. pretty unreasonable to expect him to suddenly open up
Kim Lacapria, Snopes’ main political “fact checker,” describes herself as “openly left-leaning” and a liberal. She has previously equated Tea Party conservatives with jihadists.
http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/17/fa...beral-blogger/
Snopes previously tried to “debunk” claims that the New York Times had colluded with Clinton’s campaign by warning them in advance about potentially negative stories that were about to be published, despite Wikileaks emails proving this to be true on two separate occasions.
https://www.snopes.com/news/2016/10/...nton-campaign/
https://foia.state.gov/searchapp/DOC.../C05572024.pdf
In December 2016, an investigative report revealed how Snopes was accused of using company money to pay for pros utes.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...xen-domme.html
Spurtacular is correct in his assessment that Snopes was just a tool for the DNC. Snopes has been the "official" debunker for the Clinton Cartel since it has evolved from just a myth buster operation.
where in that snopes link did they debunk that the NYT warned them in advance of storylines? what specifically is inaccurate about that snopes article?
Why posters keep attacking Snopes' staff and not it's content?
Like take that link:
https://www.snopes.com/news/2016/10/...nton-campaign/
They reached out to all parties, asked questions, sourced the material, the only one that didn't respond back was the one making the claim.
What's wrong with it? How would you want it reported otherwise?
CIA frontPERIOD
bro stop being a bluepill sheep. you're being manipulated
Add to that, Chris thinks the cult of science is after us.
dude's too ashamed to tell me what shape he thinks the earth is
/just end thread, tbh
I believe that the CIA is a sanctioned criminal organization. With that, they need to perpetually put forth PR that they and their cohorts are the good guys; and in that vain, damage control that can be funneled into a mainstream capacity is invaluable. I haven't made the claim, but I'd say I believe it's more likely than unlikely that snopes is aiding the CIA.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
