Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Swimming_Coat4177 t1_ir43rfy wrote

Reply to comment by CritaCorn in Babak Broumand Found Guilty of Selling FBI Secrets to Armenian Mob by bunnieollie

If you believe that, I have some lottery numbers to sell you. GQ is not a credible source.

−69

BadAsBroccoli t1_ir44pt3 wrote

What makes you more creditable than GQ?

29

Swimming_Coat4177 t1_ir44v39 wrote

Their articles have been discredited. It is not me who did the fact checking

−61

yiannistheman t1_ir46uew wrote

Sure, but how about the Times:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/09/us/politics/cia-informant-russia.html

The Washington Post:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/us-got-key-asset-out-of-russia-following-election-hacking/2019/09/09/c8820f70-d344-11e9-9343-40db57cf6abd_story.html

Vox:

https://www.vox.com/2019/9/9/20856915/cnn-trump-russia-spy-putin-cia

I guess they're all not credible either. At some point, when you've whittled down the list of credible sources to Fox News, you might want to have a look in the mirror.

Meanwhile - the bizarre behavior of cozying up to Putin and NK, withholding classified documentation for no reason whatsoever in a private home with uncleared staff all around - that is just normal behavior, right?

50

Swimming_Coat4177 t1_ir47fbp wrote

All of these articles show no actual proof. They all say the same thing. You ever stop and think that they may be a little biased. Also, a two investigation into Trump’s alleged Russia connection netted nothing. It was proven to be using a source paid for by the DNC

−81

yiannistheman t1_ir4818w wrote

It did nothing of the sort. In fact, the instructions from Barr in his memory, which they fought tooth and nail to keep private and was released the same day as the report, basically just said "he's the president you can't charge him'. Mueller laid out ten scenarios where obstruction would have been on the table for anyone but the King of the US. Everyone else is subject to trial and conviction based on reasonable doubt, but you'd like him to be standing over the dead body of this asset.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/hundreds-former-prosecutors-say-trump-would-have-been-indicted-if-n1002436

43

ligmallamasackinosis t1_ir4akv8 wrote

Where's your proof? You're making some big claims and no proof?? And I'm just supposed to trust you??? Lol

16

Swimming_Coat4177 t1_ir4aqdl wrote

Tim Poole interviewed a guy who actually worked on the investigation

−13

ligmallamasackinosis t1_ir4cbre wrote

Ah yeah a guy interviewed a dude about stuff. Not really doing yourself justice here..

21

Swimming_Coat4177 t1_ir4cejr wrote

If the man interviewed worked directly on the investigation that does mean a lot

−6

Morgolol t1_ir4ujvi wrote

You trust that beanie fuckwad? Holy shit. No wonder your sources are so awful. Imagine trusting pool over actual, legitimate journalists.

Also maybe read the report? And who did brick brain interview exactly? Can't find his name

12

Quincyperson t1_ir5svt8 wrote

Everyone else is biased. Tim Poole, on the other hand, calls it right down the middle

5