We Must Ignite This Couch Message Boards

(1) 2 »

 
ROBERT MUELLER’S ROLE IN US URANIUM TO RUSSIA
Pitt Hater
Joined:
7/21/2008 9:57 pm
From North Central, WV
Posts: 1643
ROBERT MUELLER’S ROLE IN CLINTON SCHEME TO SELL 20 PERCENT OF US URANIUM TO RUSSIA

"Robert Mueller's Role in Clinton Scheme to Sell 20 Percent of US Uranium
WASHINGTON, D.C. – On May 17, the day Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller as Special Counsel charged with investigating possible “Russian collusion” with President Trump’s campaign, Julian Assange at WikiLeaks tweeted a WikiLeaks released State Department cable documenting that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ordered Mueller to deliver a sample of stolen Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) to Russia in 2009.

Assange’s email signaled an investigation is needed into Mueller and his complex involvement with Russia and Uranium One, the company Bill Clinton promoted with Canadian entrepreneur Frank Giustra while Hillary Clinton served as Obama secretary of state in a criminal saga that ended up with Secretary Clinton voting to give the Russian State Atomic Nuclear Energy Agency, Rosatom, control of approximately 20 percent of all uranium holdings in the United States.

Mueller’s involvement in the Clintons’ drive to profit from selling 20 percent of U.S. uranium to Vladimir Putin’s Russian government should properly make him the target of a Department of Justice grand jury convened to examine the Clintons’ involvement with Uranium One, thereby disqualifying him from serving as Special Counsel appointed to examine that the Trump campaign “colluded” with Russia to steal the election from Hillary Clinton.

The Uranium One saga

The complex saga involves Uranium One, a company created by Canadian entrepreneur Frank Giustra, in conjunction with former president Bill Clinton, in a deal that began in 2005 when Guistra and Clinton decided to corner the uranium market in Kazakhstan and ended up with the Clinton Foundation receiving $500,000 to give a speech in Moscow, with the speaking fee paid by Renaissance Capital, RenCap, a Cyprus-registered corporation controlled by former Russian intelligence officers with close ties to Russian president Vladimir Putin.

Along the way, Clinton secretly established WJC, LLC, a limited liability company registered in Delaware using his initials as a code easily recognized by Clinton family members to serve as a “shell corporation” through which Giustra (and others) could make under-the-table money-laundered cash and stock payments to Clinton for services rendered, while various Canadian entrepreneurs made millions of dollars in mostly anonymous contributions shuffled to the Clinton Foundation in New York City via Clinton Giustra Sustainable Growth Initiative (CGSGI) in Canada.

One named contribution involved Ian Tefler, a longtime associate of Giustra who made a fortune as a gold investor while he also served as chairman of Uranium One, who funneled $2.35 million to the Clinton Foundation starting in 2009, through a Canadian entity he controlled called the Fernwood Foundation. Tefler made his contribution to a separate entity, the Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership – Canada, but as was the case with CGSGI, the funds ended up in the Clinton Foundation in New York City.

Then, in October 2010, Secretary Clinton, with the State Department being one of nine agencies on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, an interagency committee operating out of Treasury, allowed Rosatom to acquire majority control of Uranium One, effectively giving Vladimir Putin control of 20 percent of all U.S. uranium, with Hillary Clinton allowing the State Department as a CIFUS member to vote a second time, in 2013, giving Rosatom permission to acquire all remaining shares of Uranium One, with the result nobody but Putin owned 20 percent of all U.S. uranium.

Throughout this period, 2010 through 2013, Mueller, who served as FBI head from Sept. 4, 2001 to Sept. 4, 2013, did nothing to investigate the complex payments to Bill Clinton and the Clinton Foundation that give the appearance of a “pay-to-play” arrangement with Frank Giustra that allowed Bill and Hillary to reap millions of dollars, provided Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did her part to push the Uranium One deal with Putin’s Rosatum to a CFIUS approval.

Records show that Frank Giustra ultimately contributed $31 million to the Clinton Foundation and State Department cables released by WikiLeaks that show State Department officials had obtained in the Fall of 2009, an internal Rosatom memo that warned about Moscow’s intentions as it “flexes muscles” in uranium markets. Despite this warning – a year before the first CIFUS approval – Clinton did not recuse the State Department from the two CIFUS votes that gave Putin control of 20 percent of the uranium mined in the United States.

Hillary sends Mueller to Russia with uranium

The WikiLeaks tweet referenced a cable Secretary of State Clinton sent to the John Beyrle, U.S. Ambassador in Russia, the United States Ambassador to Georgia Embassy Tbilsi, and the Russian Embassy, dated Aug. 17, 2009, indicating FBI Director Mueller was planning to fly to Moscow on Sept. 21, 2009, to deliver on the tarmac a sample of highly enriched uranium (HEU) that the cable identified had been confiscated by the U.S. Department of Energy during a 2006 “nuclear smuggling sting operation involving one Russian national and several Georgian accomplices.”

The key operational language of the cable was contained in paragraph six:
(S/Rel Russia) Action request: Embassy Moscow is requested to alert at the highest appropriate level the Russian Federation that FBI Director Mueller plans to deliver the HEU sample once he arrives to Moscow on September 21. Post is requested to convey information in paragraph 5 with regard to chain of custody, and to request details on Russian Federation’s plan for picking up the material. Embassy is also requested to reconfirm the April 16 understanding from the FSB verbally that we will have no problem with the Russian Ministry of Aviation concerning Mueller’s September 21 flight clearance.

On June 19, 2017, Shephard Ambellas, the editor-in-chief of Intellihub.com, noted that the classified State Department cable in question proposed that FBI Director Mueller be the one to personally conduct the transfer of a 10-gram sample of HEU to Russian law enforcement sources during a secret “plane-side” meeting on a “tarmac” in early fall of 2009 was reminiscent of “the infamous Loretta Lynch/Bill Clinton meeting which occurred on a Phoenix, Arizona, tarmac, back in June of 2016.”
Exactly why Secretary Clinton decided it was critical to arrange a clandestine transfer of this purloined uranium sample back to Russia, carried by FBI Director Mueller in a secret trip to Moscow has never been made clear.

But several WikiLeaks cables show the State Department had been tracking Uranium One dealings with Kazakhstan since 2008, as seen here, here, and here. While Clinton apologists have insisted Mueller’s secret uranium mission to Russia has no connection to Uranium One or Secretary Clinton’s role in the CIFUS votes that allowed Putin to control 20 percent of U.S. uranium, the issue demands detailed investigation, especially since there is abundant evidence Mueller turned a blind eye to numerous highly suspicious, potentially criminal Clinton Foundation financial transactions related to Frank Giustra.

Did Secretary Clinton decide to return to Russia the sample of HEU the U.S. acquired in a 2006 Bush-era sting because the Clintons sought to communicate to Russia an interest in allowing Russia to gain control of one-fifth of all U.S. uranium via Frank Giustra’s Uranium One corporation, through transactions that promised to put hundreds of millions of dollars in the Clintons’ pockets?

In the final analysis, the question a Department of Justice grand jury needs to investigate include both whether the Clinton Foundation financial transactions involving Frank Giustra and Uranium One constituted criminal violations of federal laws regulating charities, and whether Robert Muller, as head of the FBI, acted as a “Clinton Foundation and Uranium One fixer,” equally complicit in the alleged Clinton Foundation crimes."

Jerome Corsi July 28, 2017

Posted on: 7/30 12:25 am
_________________
LET'S GO---------------------------------MOUNTAINEERS---------------
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: ROBERT MUELLER’S ROLE IN US URANIUM TO RUSSIA
Grant Ave. Warrior
Joined:
8/21/2013 9:51 pm
From Madhattan
Posts: 914
The guy who literally wrote the book on birtherism writing for Infowars? No wonder you didn't include a link to your source. Dude - I thought you were better than this. Anyway - here's some nice things for you to read.

Snopes on uranium

Snopes on infowars

Have a great day.

Posted on: 7/30 7:20 am
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: ROBERT MUELLER’S ROLE IN US URANIUM TO RUSSIA
Pitt Hater
Joined:
7/21/2008 9:57 pm
From North Central, WV
Posts: 1643
Better than what? I must say that your response was exactly as expected.

Funny you used the totally trust worthy unbiased (sarcasm) Snopes to refute the article.


Wilderness of Mirrors
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbe ... ng-the-fact-checkers/amp/


And the reason I didn't post the link was to save you from yourself, that you would be able to first read the article before putting your liberal blinders on. You're welcome bother. 🤜🏻

Posted on: 7/30 9:30 am
_________________
LET'S GO---------------------------------MOUNTAINEERS---------------
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: ROBERT MUELLER’S ROLE IN US URANIUM TO RUSSIA

Joined:
12/7/2009 7:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 12550
You should expect someone to question this author's credibility. He has shown himself to be unreliable. It isn't a liberal or conservative issue. It is an issue about this particular author. And it isn't just Snopes that has pointed to his inaccurate reporting.

Posted on: 7/30 2:51 pm
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: ROBERT MUELLER’S ROLE IN US URANIUM TO RUSSIA
Grant Ave. Warrior
Joined:
8/21/2013 9:51 pm
From Madhattan
Posts: 914
A good rule of thumb would be to avoid citing folks who have the words 'conspiracy theorist' appearing in the first sentence of the top results of a Google name search.

Anyway - do you have any other sources (preferably employing fact checkers) to corroborate this story?

Posted on: 7/30 7:43 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: ROBERT MUELLER’S ROLE IN US URANIUM TO RUSSIA
Pitt Hater
Joined:
7/21/2008 9:57 pm
From North Central, WV
Posts: 1643
Still setting yourselves as the article posting authorities. Labeling journalists as conspiracy theorists has long been a tactic of the liberal and neocon establishment to attempt to discredit any information coming from an alternative press source. I'm going to let this article stand on its own. The attempts to poo poo on this information does not affect me any. I don't feel that I have anything to prove to you two. Nor does my ego feel the need be validated by you.

Two months ago I posted an Infowars article that was based from information coming from inside sources that Trump would be purging three leakers from his staff. As we stand now two of them have been "aloud to save face and resign." (Spicer and Priebus) I'm sure number three will be resigning soon. Of course Infowars is the source, so discredit them all you want. Put your heads back in the sand from which you came. It doesn't matter to me.

I posted this article for the same reason I posted the other article a few months ago. I posted it to get the information out there. This is source information. The liberal media won't report on this until they have to. They won't report on it until it would be blatantly obvious that they were trying to cover it up. They would only report on it to save face. That is when your fact checkers will provide backing. At that point they will act like they never attempted to cover up the truth.

Yes I'm jaded. It's the same old song and dance. At least now this information is out there. That way if and when it all comes to fruition, you all won't be able to deny that it was the "conspiracy theorists" that were telling the truth from the beginning.


Posted on: 7/31 6:31 am
_________________
LET'S GO---------------------------------MOUNTAINEERS---------------
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: ROBERT MUELLER’S ROLE IN US URANIUM TO RUSSIA
Pitt Hater
Joined:
7/21/2008 9:57 pm
From North Central, WV
Posts: 1643
It might not be on topic, but here is a semi-related article from what I assume you guys would consider to be a credible source. Though I'm sure you will contrive some excuse to cast this article aside. Again left wing media catching up to what Infowars has been reporting for quite sometime.


The quest to prove collusion is crumbling
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/p ... g/?utm_term=.dcc87074eaef

Posted on: 7/31 8:14 am
_________________
LET'S GO---------------------------------MOUNTAINEERS---------------
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: ROBERT MUELLER’S ROLE IN US URANIUM TO RUSSIA

Joined:
12/7/2009 7:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 12550
Quote:

EERY wrote:
It might not be on topic, but here is a semi-related article from what I assume you guys would consider to be a credible source. Though I'm sure you will contrive some excuse to cast this article aside. Again left wing media catching up to what Infowars has been reporting for quite sometime.


The quest to prove collusion is crumbling
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/p ... g/?utm_term=.dcc87074eaef


While you may consider the Post to be "left wing media," Ed Rogers, the author of the blog post, is a devout Republican who works on Republican campaigns. Click on his name and it shows you all of the articles he has written for the Post, and they are all pro-right wing or republican. Also, this isn't a news piece--it is an opinion piece written by someone on the right wing. I had already read it and think it is a bit of wishful thinking and ignoring evidence that we know exists, but whatever. Everyone sees it differently I guess.

Maybe it is time for you to recognize that the Washington Post includes right wing writers on its staff, like Ed Rogers and Jennifer Rubin, and stop calling it "left wing media."

Posted on: 7/31 9:58 am
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: ROBERT MUELLER’S ROLE IN US URANIUM TO RUSSIA

Joined:
12/7/2009 7:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 12550
Quote:

EERY wrote:
Still setting yourselves as the article posting authorities. Labeling journalists as conspiracy theorists has long been a tactic of the liberal and neocon establishment to attempt to discredit any information coming from an alternative press source. I'm going to let this article stand on its own. The attempts to poo poo on this information does not affect me any. I don't feel that I have anything to prove to you two. Nor does my ego feel the need be validated by you.

Two months ago I posted an Infowars article that was based from information coming from inside sources that Trump would be purging three leakers from his staff. As we stand now two of them have been "aloud to save face and resign." (Spicer and Priebus) I'm sure number three will be resigning soon. Of course Infowars is the source, so discredit them all you want. Put your heads back in the sand from which you came. It doesn't matter to me.

I posted this article for the same reason I posted the other article a few months ago. I posted it to get the information out there. This is source information. The liberal media won't report on this until they have to. They won't report on it until it would be blatantly obvious that they were trying to cover it up. They would only report on it to save face. That is when your fact checkers will provide backing. At that point they will act like they never attempted to cover up the truth.

Yes I'm jaded. It's the same old song and dance. At least now this information is out there. That way if and when it all comes to fruition, you all won't be able to deny that it was the "conspiracy theorists" that were telling the truth from the beginning.



Sorry, but this particular author has been discredited on multiple occasions. There is nothing wrong with readers verifying that they are being told the truth. It is called due diligence, and it allows you to form opinions based on actual facts.

Posted on: 7/31 10:00 am
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: ROBERT MUELLER’S ROLE IN US URANIUM TO RUSSIA
Pitt Hater
Joined:
5/30/2007 5:14 pm
From Columbus, OH (via Belpre, OH)
Posts: 1440
Quote:

EERY wrote:

Two months ago I posted an Infowars article that was based from information coming from inside sources that Trump would be purging three leakers from his staff. As we stand now two of them have been "aloud to save face and resign." (Spicer and Priebus) I'm sure number three will be resigning soon. Of course Infowars is the source, so discredit them all you want. Put your heads back in the sand from which you came. It doesn't matter to me.




Dude, you were totally right! Scaramucci resigned today. Although, I'm not sure what the guy could leak in 10 days. I guess saying someone in the Trump administration is going to resign or be fired is like saying the sun is going to rise.

Posted on: 7/31 6:22 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: ROBERT MUELLER’S ROLE IN US URANIUM TO RUSSIA
Gettin' Schmitty
Joined:
7/8/2008 8:36 pm
From Around
Posts: 6355
The fact you discredit a journalist because he writes for Infowars but will believe and use as proof an article from Snopes is so **** hilarious. You guys have to be trolling.

Also,

Mooch was hired to be OECD Ambassador. Priebus prevented Mooch from being hired. Trump steps in to make Mooch communications director. Spicer, who filled both roles as press secretary and communications director, resigns as press secretary. Spicer doesn't officially leave the position until August. Sarah is appointed as the new press secretary. Mooch goes after the leakers. Mooch gives interview calling out Priebus and Bannon. Priebus resigns as chief of staff. Kelly, the secretary of Homeland security, is appointed as the new chief of staff. Vacancy at Homeland security is given to the deputy secretary, Elaine Duke. Mooch is fired from communications director by Kelly. Mooch will be transferred to OECD Ambassador. The goal was to get rid of Priebus. Spicer will be the new communications director.

Posted on: 8/1 8:20 am
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: ROBERT MUELLER’S ROLE IN US URANIUM TO RUSSIA
Pitt Hater
Joined:
7/21/2008 9:57 pm
From North Central, WV
Posts: 1643
Quote:

Eers88 wrote:
Quote:

EERY wrote:
Still setting yourselves as the article posting authorities. Labeling journalists as conspiracy theorists has long been a tactic of the liberal and neocon establishment to attempt to discredit any information coming from an alternative press source. I'm going to let this article stand on its own. The attempts to poo poo on this information does not affect me any. I don't feel that I have anything to prove to you two. Nor does my ego feel the need be validated by you.

Two months ago I posted an Infowars article that was based from information coming from inside sources that Trump would be purging three leakers from his staff. As we stand now two of them have been "aloud to save face and resign." (Spicer and Priebus) I'm sure number three will be resigning soon. Of course Infowars is the source, so discredit them all you want. Put your heads back in the sand from which you came. It doesn't matter to me.

I posted this article for the same reason I posted the other article a few months ago. I posted it to get the information out there. This is source information. The liberal media won't report on this until they have to. They won't report on it until it would be blatantly obvious that they were trying to cover it up. They would only report on it to save face. That is when your fact checkers will provide backing. At that point they will act like they never attempted to cover up the truth.

Yes I'm jaded. It's the same old song and dance. At least now this information is out there. That way if and when it all comes to fruition, you all won't be able to deny that it was the "conspiracy theorists" that were telling the truth from the beginning.



Sorry, but this particular author has been discredited on multiple occasions. There is nothing wrong with readers verifying that they are being told the truth. It is called due diligence, and it allows you to form opinions based on actual facts.


Funny that I only ever see you defending "actual facts" that support your personal opinion. I didn't even have to guess where you would fall on any of this.

Perhaps I should pull a Hill Billiam on you and challenge you to prove your point using only sources that I count as credible. You guys are hilarious.

Posted on: 8/1 9:50 am
_________________
LET'S GO---------------------------------MOUNTAINEERS---------------
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: ROBERT MUELLER’S ROLE IN US URANIUM TO RUSSIA

Joined:
12/7/2009 7:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 12550
Quote:

EERY wrote:
Quote:

Eers88 wrote:
Quote:

EERY wrote:
Still setting yourselves as the article posting authorities. Labeling journalists as conspiracy theorists has long been a tactic of the liberal and neocon establishment to attempt to discredit any information coming from an alternative press source. I'm going to let this article stand on its own. The attempts to poo poo on this information does not affect me any. I don't feel that I have anything to prove to you two. Nor does my ego feel the need be validated by you.

Two months ago I posted an Infowars article that was based from information coming from inside sources that Trump would be purging three leakers from his staff. As we stand now two of them have been "aloud to save face and resign." (Spicer and Priebus) I'm sure number three will be resigning soon. Of course Infowars is the source, so discredit them all you want. Put your heads back in the sand from which you came. It doesn't matter to me.

I posted this article for the same reason I posted the other article a few months ago. I posted it to get the information out there. This is source information. The liberal media won't report on this until they have to. They won't report on it until it would be blatantly obvious that they were trying to cover it up. They would only report on it to save face. That is when your fact checkers will provide backing. At that point they will act like they never attempted to cover up the truth.

Yes I'm jaded. It's the same old song and dance. At least now this information is out there. That way if and when it all comes to fruition, you all won't be able to deny that it was the "conspiracy theorists" that were telling the truth from the beginning.



Sorry, but this particular author has been discredited on multiple occasions. There is nothing wrong with readers verifying that they are being told the truth. It is called due diligence, and it allows you to form opinions based on actual facts.


Funny that I only ever see you defending "actual facts" that support your personal opinion. I didn't even have to guess where you would fall on any of this.

Perhaps I should pull a Hill Billiam on you and challenge you to prove your point using only sources that I count as credible. You guys are hilarious.


That tends to happen when people form their opinions based on actual provable credible facts. My aim is to come to the right conclusion, not to support my basic instinct or initial reaction, which is often times based on emotion and implicit bias rather than reason, and also suffers from very limited input/data/experience. Trying to prove your initial feeling about something as "right" is not as effective as researching something to come to the correct conclusion.

Posted on: 8/1 11:21 am
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: ROBERT MUELLER’S ROLE IN US URANIUM TO RUSSIA

Joined:
12/7/2009 7:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 12550
Quote:

wvufan1818 wrote:
The fact you discredit a journalist because he writes for Infowars but will believe and use as proof an article from Snopes is so **** hilarious. You guys have to be trolling.

Also,

Mooch was hired to be OECD Ambassador. Priebus prevented Mooch from being hired. Trump steps in to make Mooch communications director. Spicer, who filled both roles as press secretary and communications director, resigns as press secretary. Spicer doesn't officially leave the position until August. Sarah is appointed as the new press secretary. Mooch goes after the leakers. Mooch gives interview calling out Priebus and Bannon. Priebus resigns as chief of staff. Kelly, the secretary of Homeland security, is appointed as the new chief of staff. Vacancy at Homeland security is given to the deputy secretary, Elaine Duke. Mooch is fired from communications director by Kelly. Mooch will be transferred to OECD Ambassador. The goal was to get rid of Priebus. Spicer will be the new communications director.


So then your argument is that the White House is the most dysfunctional passive-agressive office in the country? If the goal was to get rid of Priebus, why not just get rid of Priebus? Sorry, doesn't add up.

Posted on: 8/1 11:25 am
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: ROBERT MUELLER’S ROLE IN US URANIUM TO RUSSIA
Gettin' Schmitty
Joined:
7/8/2008 8:36 pm
From Around
Posts: 6355
Quote:

Eers88 wrote:
Quote:

wvufan1818 wrote:
The fact you discredit a journalist because he writes for Infowars but will believe and use as proof an article from Snopes is so **** hilarious. You guys have to be trolling.

Also,

Mooch was hired to be OECD Ambassador. Priebus prevented Mooch from being hired. Trump steps in to make Mooch communications director. Spicer, who filled both roles as press secretary and communications director, resigns as press secretary. Spicer doesn't officially leave the position until August. Sarah is appointed as the new press secretary. Mooch goes after the leakers. Mooch gives interview calling out Priebus and Bannon. Priebus resigns as chief of staff. Kelly, the secretary of Homeland security, is appointed as the new chief of staff. Vacancy at Homeland security is given to the deputy secretary, Elaine Duke. Mooch is fired from communications director by Kelly. Mooch will be transferred to OECD Ambassador. The goal was to get rid of Priebus. Spicer will be the new communications director.


So then your argument is that the White House is the most dysfunctional passive-agressive office in the country? If the goal was to get rid of Priebus, why not just get rid of Priebus? Sorry, doesn't add up.


Nope. Not my argument. Doesn't surprise me that you don't understand though.

Posted on: 8/2 12:30 am
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: ROBERT MUELLER’S ROLE IN US URANIUM TO RUSSIA
Pitt Hater
Joined:
7/21/2008 9:57 pm
From North Central, WV
Posts: 1643
Quote:

Eers88 wrote:
Quote:

EERY wrote:
Quote:

Eers88 wrote:
Quote:

EERY wrote:
Still setting yourselves as the article posting authorities. Labeling journalists as conspiracy theorists has long been a tactic of the liberal and neocon establishment to attempt to discredit any information coming from an alternative press source. I'm going to let this article stand on its own. The attempts to poo poo on this information does not affect me any. I don't feel that I have anything to prove to you two. Nor does my ego feel the need be validated by you.

Two months ago I posted an Infowars article that was based from information coming from inside sources that Trump would be purging three leakers from his staff. As we stand now two of them have been "aloud to save face and resign." (Spicer and Priebus) I'm sure number three will be resigning soon. Of course Infowars is the source, so discredit them all you want. Put your heads back in the sand from which you came. It doesn't matter to me.

I posted this article for the same reason I posted the other article a few months ago. I posted it to get the information out there. This is source information. The liberal media won't report on this until they have to. They won't report on it until it would be blatantly obvious that they were trying to cover it up. They would only report on it to save face. That is when your fact checkers will provide backing. At that point they will act like they never attempted to cover up the truth.

Yes I'm jaded. It's the same old song and dance. At least now this information is out there. That way if and when it all comes to fruition, you all won't be able to deny that it was the "conspiracy theorists" that were telling the truth from the beginning.



Sorry, but this particular author has been discredited on multiple occasions. There is nothing wrong with readers verifying that they are being told the truth. It is called due diligence, and it allows you to form opinions based on actual facts.


Funny that I only ever see you defending "actual facts" that support your personal opinion. I didn't even have to guess where you would fall on any of this.

Perhaps I should pull a Hill Billiam on you and challenge you to prove your point using only sources that I count as credible. You guys are hilarious.


That tends to happen when people form their opinions based on actual provable credible facts. My aim is to come to the right conclusion, not to support my basic instinct or initial reaction, which is often times based on emotion and implicit bias rather than reason, and also suffers from very limited input/data/experience. Trying to prove your initial feeling about something as "right" is not as effective as researching something to come to the correct conclusion.


Oh so that what you were doing. Could have fooled me. Again laughable.

Posted on: 8/3 11:38 am
_________________
LET'S GO---------------------------------MOUNTAINEERS---------------
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: ROBERT MUELLER’S ROLE IN US URANIUM TO RUSSIA

Joined:
12/7/2009 7:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 12550
Quote:

EERY wrote:
Quote:

Eers88 wrote:
Quote:

EERY wrote:
Quote:

Eers88 wrote:
Quote:

EERY wrote:
Still setting yourselves as the article posting authorities. Labeling journalists as conspiracy theorists has long been a tactic of the liberal and neocon establishment to attempt to discredit any information coming from an alternative press source. I'm going to let this article stand on its own. The attempts to poo poo on this information does not affect me any. I don't feel that I have anything to prove to you two. Nor does my ego feel the need be validated by you.

Two months ago I posted an Infowars article that was based from information coming from inside sources that Trump would be purging three leakers from his staff. As we stand now two of them have been "aloud to save face and resign." (Spicer and Priebus) I'm sure number three will be resigning soon. Of course Infowars is the source, so discredit them all you want. Put your heads back in the sand from which you came. It doesn't matter to me.

I posted this article for the same reason I posted the other article a few months ago. I posted it to get the information out there. This is source information. The liberal media won't report on this until they have to. They won't report on it until it would be blatantly obvious that they were trying to cover it up. They would only report on it to save face. That is when your fact checkers will provide backing. At that point they will act like they never attempted to cover up the truth.

Yes I'm jaded. It's the same old song and dance. At least now this information is out there. That way if and when it all comes to fruition, you all won't be able to deny that it was the "conspiracy theorists" that were telling the truth from the beginning.



Sorry, but this particular author has been discredited on multiple occasions. There is nothing wrong with readers verifying that they are being told the truth. It is called due diligence, and it allows you to form opinions based on actual facts.


Funny that I only ever see you defending "actual facts" that support your personal opinion. I didn't even have to guess where you would fall on any of this.

Perhaps I should pull a Hill Billiam on you and challenge you to prove your point using only sources that I count as credible. You guys are hilarious.


That tends to happen when people form their opinions based on actual provable credible facts. My aim is to come to the right conclusion, not to support my basic instinct or initial reaction, which is often times based on emotion and implicit bias rather than reason, and also suffers from very limited input/data/experience. Trying to prove your initial feeling about something as "right" is not as effective as researching something to come to the correct conclusion.


Oh so that what you were doing. Could have fooled me. Again laughable.


You just keep proving the point.

Posted on: 8/3 12:01 pm
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: ROBERT MUELLER’S ROLE IN US URANIUM TO RUSSIA
Pitt Hater
Joined:
7/21/2008 9:57 pm
From North Central, WV
Posts: 1643
The feeling is mutual.

Posted on: 8/3 12:04 pm
_________________
LET'S GO---------------------------------MOUNTAINEERS---------------
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: ROBERT MUELLER’S ROLE IN US URANIUM TO RUSSIA

Joined:
12/7/2009 7:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 12550
Quote:

EERY wrote:
The feeling is mutual.


You did it again. Opinions based on "feelings" aren't very good opinions.

Posted on: 8/3 12:29 pm
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: ROBERT MUELLER’S ROLE IN US URANIUM TO RUSSIA
Pitt Hater
Joined:
7/21/2008 9:57 pm
From North Central, WV
Posts: 1643
Well at least you got in the last word on the matter. I'm sure you are "feeling" proud of yourself.

Posted on: 8/5 4:24 pm
_________________
LET'S GO---------------------------------MOUNTAINEERS---------------
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 



(1) 2 »




Login
Username:

Password:

remember me





Copyright © 2004-2011 wemustignitethiscouch.com All Rights Reserved