NWO/Illuminati US politics - Pt 4

Remove this Banner Ad

Here is PART 3

Donald Trump was sworn in as president of the United States on Monday 20th January, 2025 in Washington DC.

Take Note

Anti-trans commentary will be deleted and warnings issued, that includes mockery and trying to pass it off as a joke.

Play nice, please.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

HitTheNailOnTheHead said:
I didn't say they couldn't possibly be lying I merely said it may have been sensitive but there "wasn't enough specific information to make any of it actionable. I don't believe the information is classified. Hegseth, Ratcliffe, Gabbard and the White House all said the chats contained no classified information. So unless you think they're all lying, that's where we are."

You've now made it clear you think Hegseth is lying along with Gabbard but just now I notice you've omitted mentioning Ratcliffe in the same vein. Maybe you haven't come to a conclusion on whether he's lying yet. Here's his testimony to the Senate Intelligence Committee. Doesn't look like he's lying to me, in fact if anything as he pointed out in his testimony, Jeffrey Goldberg was the one who has been lying.
Click to expand...
The "so unless you think they're all lying" bit is the part that implies you don't think they're lying mate, can we stop beating around the bush please.

And no, don't read anything into the non mention of Ratcliffe in this single post of mine. He was lying as well because he stated there was no classified info along with Gabbard in the hearing, which was objectively disproved via the release of the text chats the next day.

For the last time mate, I don't care if Goldberg is a good journalist or a bad one, it doesn't matter at this point. His reporting has been corroborated by the bloody whitehouse, they've confirmed the Signal chats are legit and Waltz has said multiple times he takes responsibility for the **** up. So what on earth are you accusing Goldberg of lying about?

HitTheNailOnTheHead said:
Goldberg tried to get Ratcliffe skewered with the Intelligence Identities Protection Act by suggesting Ratcliffe had included the name of an “undercover” CIA officer in the chat. It turns out the person was his Chief of Staff and not an undercover operative.
Click to expand...
No thats not correct, Goldberg acknowledged the person was a Chief of Staff and the name was withheld at the request of the CIA.
A CIA spokesperson asked us to withhold the name of John Ratcliffe’s chief of staff, which Ratcliffe had shared in the Signal chain, because CIA intelligence officers are traditionally not publicly identified. Ratcliffe had testified earlier yesterday that the officer is not undercover and said it was “completely appropriate” to share their name in the Signal conversation. We will continue to withhold the name of the officer. Otherwise, the messages are unredacted.
Click to expand...

HitTheNailOnTheHead said:
Goldberg is a snake mate.
Click to expand...
So you keep saying. Is it possible you hold this opinion of him primarily due to misinformation like the example you've repeated above?

It wouldn't even matter at this point if he did confuse the Chief of Staff for an undercover agent, enough with this tangent. I gotta say its kinda weird how tangents are all you want to focus on rather than the main issue, that being the Defense Sec communicated classified plans on a Signal group chat.

HitTheNailOnTheHead said:
He's been lying his whole career with little if any consequences but here you are suggesting Gabbard and Ratcliffe have been lying to the Committee. I suppose we'll find out eventually since there's stiff penalties for doing so presumably. I think the Democrats will be looking at every legal option open to them in that scenario.
Click to expand...
Ha, in a functional system there definitely should be stiff penalties for doing so, that time is long past in the US unfortunately. 3 SC judges flat out lied in their confirmation hearings on RvW, all good play on :drunk:

I'm not suggesting they were lying, I'm outright declaring it based on their statements about there being no classified info in the hearing and the subsequent release of the chat text. They lied, clearly and objectively. The only way this conclusion can be avoided is by engaging in the fantasy you have been ie. that the timings of future strikes doesn't constitute classified info. Sorry but the official policy says otherwise, here it is again; "lnformation providing indication or advance warning that the US or its allies are preparing an attack".

So, if I could ask you again..
bourbons said:
So this appears to be a chance to alter how we interact with each other and take some verified, objective facts on board in consideration of our positions, and possibly even learn something occasionally. Considering everything I've laid out above, is it still your contention that the chat contained no classified information?
Click to expand...

I'd also apprecaite your acknowledgement that Goldberg won't be subject to the same legals as Trump becuase the details and circumstances of their situations are so different as to be absurd, as I clarified for you when asked to.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Lebbo73 said:
Economic indicators mean nothing in a central bank controlled economy. Trump is in the process of destroying this economy that has been stealing from the middle class and making the less off poorer! As well as redefining slavery in the process.
Click to expand...
Oh Lebs you beautiful mind.

A centrally planned economy.
Aka socialism.
Is now good! Screw the market economy.

I thought you were anti-socialist?
 
HitTheNailOnTheHead said:
I doubt it would have have helped them do anything TBH. The US has been bombing them every day for two weeks now and they haven't been able to mount any sort of defense in all of that time.
Click to expand...
How about the initial strike?

2 hours notice is better than no notice in terms of prepping any potential defenses, before they're possibly destroyed in subsequent strikes, yes? Can you at least allow that much?
 
faible said:
Trump tariffs the entire world.

ET:

I BLAME ALBO
Click to expand...
Interesting hypocrisy isn't it?

If every country is applying tariffs on the US, how come Trump can't negotiate his way out of them? Why is it an Albo problem?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

EasternTiger said:
Public perception mate.

When I was filling up this morning bloke at the servo reckoned this is Albo’s fault (lol admittedly after I spread a bit of mayo)

Right or wrong there are many in the electorate who will blame the pm.
Click to expand...
Of course, hence my comment, to be fair.

Trump's election victory was a victory for bullshit shouting 'fake news'.
 
How will poor Nambia cope with their new tariffs?
 
bourbons said:
No thats not correct, Goldberg acknowledged the person was a Chief of Staff and the name was withheld at the request of the CIA.
Click to expand...

Fk me. It's TRUE!!! Goldberg did lie when he claimed Ratcliffe had given the name of an undercover operative in the chats. Just because the dogshit media you consume isn't reporting on it doesn't mean it didn't happen. Here are his actual words.

Miller: There was a covert CIA operative named on the thread, right?

Goldberg: "Well, I guess, and I withheld her name ... They named somebody who’s an active CIA officer in this thread, which is on Signal, again, a commercial app … and I withheld it, I didn't put it in the story because she's undercover. But, I mean, the CIA Director put it into the chat.
Click to expand...

You probably still don't believe me. It's from the Bulwark podcast.



Mate if that is going to be your approach, accusing me of lying when I'm absolutely telling the truth, I'm done with discussing this nothingburger. It's been done to death. Thre only thing that hasn't been done to death is the success of the operation against the Houthis in contrast to President Autopen's inaction on the issue. Actually, worse than inaction.

The Biden Administration sat back as a band of pirates — with precision-guided, Iran-provided weaponry — exacted a toll system in one of the most important shipping lanes in the world.

In fact, since 2023, Houthi terrorists attacked U.S. Navy warships 174 times and attacked commercial shipping vessels 145 times — and as a result, 75% of U.S.-flagged shipping has been forced to navigate the southern coast of Africa rather than through the Suez Canal. Biden’s weakness invited these unacceptable attacks — while President Trump put these terrorists on notice:

  • BIDEN: Removed the Houthis from the list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations.
  • TRUMP: Immediately re-designated the Houthis as a Foreign Terrorist Organization.
  • BIDEN: Allowed the Houthis to attack U.S. Navy ships and shut down commercial traffic through the Red Sea — responding in feckless, pinprick “attacks.”
  • TRUMP: Launched successful, large-scale strikes against the Houthis, eliminating senior terrorists within the organization and putting the world on notice.

Trump Administration’s Actions Made Houthi Terrorists Pay

Democrats and their media allies have seemingly forgotten that President Donald J. Trump and his National Security team successfully killed terrorists who
www.whitehouse.gov
 

NWO/Illuminati US politics - Pt 4


Write your reply...

Similar threads

HitTheNailOnTheHead
Conspiracy Theory You have more chance of winning US lotto than drowning and yet the Obama and the Clinton chefs have both apparently drowned. What is going on?
Replies
12
Views
1K
LuvtheKangas
LuvtheKangas
Back
Top