US Extracted top Russian spy over fears Trump would accidentally expose him

S

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
PsyOps said:
No, I let you do all the obsessive paying of attention to all-things-Trump-is-evil.

I don't think someone in such a position of power, who swore and oath to support and defend the constitution would tread on violating the 1st amendment with a lawsuit.
Click to expand...


The 1st amendment doesn't cover outright lies so this whole "fake news" thing should be an easy thing to solve unless perhaps its merely a way to allow his supporters to dismiss the truth about Trump
 
Gilligan

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
kom526 said:
NYT and WaPo followed up on this CNN story and thoroughly debunked the original falsehood from CNN.
Click to expand...
You know it was a major FU on CNN's part when even their fellow travelers on the far left are debunking their story.
 
PsyOps

PsyOps

Pixelated
Sapidus said:
The 1st amendment doesn't cover outright lies so this whole "fake news" thing should be an easy thing to solve unless perhaps its merely a way to allow his supporters to dismiss the truth about Trump
Click to expand...

Sure it does. Look at CNN. Every hour is spent lying about this president, and they are still broadcasting. There is no law that states you can't lie; unless you're under oath or if that lie leads to defamation - in which you must show real damages. In the case of the president, I don't believe he can sue under these conditions given his position of power and influence. It potentially becomes a constitutional problem.
 
Chris0nllyn

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
This_person said:
Here's the FIRST paragraph you posted: “Asked for comment, Brittany Bramell, the CIA director of public affairs, told CNN: "CNN's narrative that the Central Intelligence Agency makes life-or-death decisions based on anything other than objective analysis and sound collection is simply false. Misguided speculation that the President's handling of our nation's most sensitive intelligence—which he has access to each and every day—drove an alleged exfiltration operation is inaccurate."
Click to expand...

Realistically speaking, do you think the CIA would say, "yea, the story is correct"?

Interestingly enough, this story just came out.
The Russian news site Daily Storm reported in September 2017 that Smolenkov, who had once worked in the Russian embassy in Washington, had not been seen since he went on holiday with his wife and three children to Montenegro in June of that year. The Russian authorities first investigated the disappearance as a possible murder but then became convinced that Smolenkov was still alive and living abroad.

On Monday night, the New York Times and Washington Post confirmed a CNN report that a US agent inside the Kremlin had been spirited out to the US after concerns about his safety, but they did not name the spy.

The US reports said that the agent had worked for US intelligence for more than a decade and reached a senior level with access to Putin himself. According to CNN, he had even provided pictures of documents on Putin’s desk.
Click to expand...
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/sep/10/us-spy-russia-kremlin-putin-administration-trump

Take that with a grain of salt. This whole story is he-said, she-said and it's all about whom you believe. I think expecting the CIA to corroborate the story is silly.
 
S

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
PsyOps said:
Sure it does. Look at CNN. Every hour is spent lying about this president, and they are still broadcasting. There is no law that states you can't lie; unless you're under oath or if that lie leads to defamation - in which you must show real damages. In the case of the president, I don't believe he can sue under these conditions given his position of power and influence. It potentially becomes a constitutional problem.
Click to expand...


That is exactly where the conversation started idiot. If they are all lies why doesn’t the president sue? Your response. Well they all lie about him! What sense does that make?

Have you heard of defamation ? That is a. Real thing. If they were lying Trump could sue on those grounds or even harrasment or I’m sure a lawyer could come up with some other things

He doesn’t because it is all verifiable.
 
This_person

This_person

Well-Known Member
Sapidus said:
That is exactly where the conversation started idiot. If they are all lies why doesn’t the president sue? Your response. Well they all lie about him! What sense does that make?

Have you heard of defamation ? That is a. Real thing. If they were lying Trump could sue on those grounds or even harrasment or I’m sure a lawyer could come up with some other things

He doesn’t because it is all verifiable.
Click to expand...
And, yet, you can't verify it.

See, to sue, one would have to not be the president. As president, mostly news articles can say anything damned thing they want so long as they include weasel words like, "according to sources close to the situation" or some other such thing.

"It's the difference between paper law, and trial law."
 
S

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
This_person said:
And, yet, you can't verify it.

See, to sue, one would have to not be the president. As president, mostly news articles can say anything damned thing they want so long as they include weasel words like, "according to sources close to the situation" or some other such thing.

"It's the difference between paper law, and trial law."
Click to expand...


Wrong again. Once it comes to a trial you would have to prove to a judge those sources exist and that the quotes are real.

It would be very simple to do. He doesn’t do it because he is a lair.

Melania successfully sued already during this presidency.
 
This_person

This_person

Well-Known Member
Sapidus said:
Wrong again. Once it comes to a trial you would have to prove to a judge those sources exist and that the quotes are real.

It would be very simple to do. He doesn’t do it because he is a lair.

Melania successfully sued already during this presidency.
Click to expand...
Last I checked, Melania is not president
 
Yooper

Yooper

Up. Identified. Lase. Fire. On the way.
This, like the Politico Prestwick story, is a joke. If you've served even one minute in the intel arena/with the IC you would see the multitudes of problems with it. Actually sounds more like one of the plot lines in the "Red Sparrow" trilogy (all quite good, btw.).

--- End of line (MCP)
 
PsyOps

PsyOps

Pixelated
Sapidus said:
That is exactly where the conversation started idiot. If they are all lies why doesn’t the president sue? Your response. Well they all lie about him! What sense does that make?

Have you heard of defamation ? That is a. Real thing. If they were lying Trump could sue on those grounds or even harrasment or I’m sure a lawyer could come up with some other things

He doesn’t because it is all verifiable.
Click to expand...

That wasn't my response at all. I said CNN spends every hour lying about Trump; but that's not why he doesn't sue. I said, I don't think a sitting president can sue. A sitting president suing a "news organization" (and I use that term very very loosely) potentially crosses constitutional lines. It, at a minimum, would appear that a president is trying to shut down free speech. As a civilian, you can sue all you want. As someone that has taken an oath to support and defend the constitution, that becomes a problem. Defamation is a very difficult thing to prove anyway.

CNN is overt in their pursuit to destroy Trump. It's one thing to criticize Trump for things he says or does - there's a lot that I don't like about Trump - but to consistently make things up, or completely misreport something, and do it on purpose, is just unacceptable for a so-called "news organization". In this instance, it's looking like the actual leak of this CIA agent might have come from Brennan. What a surprise... he hates Trump and works for CNN. But, if you want to be part of this propaganda machine, and swallow every lie that comes from them, I happen to think that makes you the "idiot".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top