Quote:

---

kpo: Watersportsgate.
SECOND: ... http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/01/bbcs-paul-wood-there-are
-four-sources-possible-trump-russia-blackmail

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
shit and claims and allegations and nonsense ...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
and all the crap SECOND eats up with gusto. Like 'watersportsgate'.

You're such a tool, SECOND.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
If California were to leave the US it could be 100 years before we saw a Democrat for president again. I don't think that is a good thing.

The idea that this could actually happen is laughable though. How could you start a country when you're already that far in debt?

I mean, financially it would be wonderful for the rest of the country, but I just don't see how this could ever happen.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
That debt is NOT California's. It belongs to Trump's Federal Government.

---

Quote:

---

You make these statements and half the time it's in reply for something someone else said and the other half it's just you making sh*t up again. If you have evidence of me being "snookered time and time again" please provide.

---

Quote:

---

BTW1 - so why are you and Kiki suddenly twinning on "recording for posterity?"

---

Quote:

---

BTW2 - did you listen to the video finally? The one you posted that you said showed Trump didn't say, "grab them by the p*ssy" but in fact actually had him saying that?

---

Quote:

---

Except that's not what he said. What he said was "... and when you're a star THEY LET YOU DO IT."

---

Quote:

---

You know, I'm automatically attracted to beautiful. It's like a magnet, I just start kissing

---

Quote:

---

Just kiss, I don't even wait. And when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab em by the pussy. You can do anything

---

Quote:

---

How do you expect anyone to listen to you about anything if you can't even get something that simple right?

---

Quote:

---

http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=61303
'G' Just to remind you - you signed on to the fake news 'watersportsgate'. - KIKI

'Kiki' - just to remind - you make fake conclusions.- GSTRING

---

Quote:

---

So - show of hands: who thinks the president elect p*ssy grabber didn't get up to some naughty sh*t while being wined and dined in Russia? If that goofy elf from Entertainment Tonight can get him on tape anyone can. I bet it is epic stuff.= GSTRING

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by G:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=61303

'G'

Just to remind you - you signed on to the fake news 'watersportsgate'.

---

'Kiki' - just to remind - you make fake conclusions.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
and all the crap SECOND eats up with gusto. Like 'watersportsgate'.

You're such a tool, SECOND.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
How about this "Fake News" (except it is not fake):

Peter Thiel, etc.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
No... that's California's debt.

http://uscommonsense.org/research/unsustainable-california-the-top-10-
issues-facing-the-golden-state-wall-of-debt/

All 443 Billion of it.

---

Quote:

---

The official Wall of Debt vastly understates the actual magnitude of the state’s debt. The actual wall is $443 billion. The complete wall builds upon the smaller official one and includes the following: retirement benefit debt, bond debt, deferred infrastructure maintenance, deferred payments, federal unemployment funds, and interfund borrowing.

The state has largely foregone infrastructure maintenance over the last half-decade, and as a result, California now requires an estimated $64.6 billion in maintenance costs to restore the quality of its infrastructure. Officially, the state’s unfunded public pension and retiree healthcare liabilities total $218.6 billion. Additionally, the state’s outstanding general obligation bonds ($81.1 billion), unissued bonds ($30 billion) and lease revenue bonds ($11.3 billion) total $122.4 billion.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by G:
'Kiki' - just to remind - you make fake conclusions.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=61303
'G'

Just to remind you - you signed on to the fake news 'watersportsgate'.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by G:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/11/us/politics/donald-trump-russia-int
elligence.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=a-lede-package-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

A good time line from NYT - it's a bit of a mess without a script!

So - show of hands: who thinks the president elect p*ssy grabber didn't get up to some naughty sh*t while being wined and dined in Russia? If that goofy elf from Entertainment Tonight can get him on tape anyone can. I bet it is epic stuff.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Troll.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THGRRI:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Troll.

---

---

Quote:

---

After Russiagate, Why WOULDN’T People Be Skeptical About Covid?

You hardly ever hear about Russiagate anymore. ...

Looking at mainstream news outlets in 2021, you’d hardly know they’d recently spent years hammering the (Russiagate) story into public consciousness that Vladimir Putin had infiltrated the highest levels of the US government, day after day after day after day after day.

But they did. Vast fortunes were raked in off the public interest generated by click-friendly stories about the latest BOMBSHELL revelation involving some peripheral member of Trump’s associates perhaps maybe having some kind of contact with a Russian national at some point. Entire careers were built on this.

Then the Mueller investigation invalidated the entire claim by failing to indict a single American for conspiring with the Russian government, and the mass media who’d spent the previous few years bashing everyone in the face with that story just kind of slowly sidled away from it.

And now they act like it never happened.

Now I'm going to ask you to put yourself in the shoes of someone you might not normally be inclined to.

Imagine you’re someone on the political right watching this whole thing unfold. Imagine that from late 2016 to mid-2019 you were watching the mass media aggressively shove this story down everyone’s throat that a US president, whom you support, is secretly working for a hostile foreign government with the goal of subverting the United States of America. The media you consume have been highlighting all the massive, glaring plot holes in this narrative the entire time, so you know it’s not true, yet you’ve still got friends, coworkers and family members who believe it is.

Can you imagine how disgusted you’d get with the media watching this happen day after day? How outraged? How resentful? If you’re really putting yourself there, I think you probably can.

Now imagine a year later these exact same media institutions start telling you there’s a novel coronavirus which we’re all going to have to sacrifice some personal liberties in order to stop. We might have to stay in our homes, wear a mask, get injected with new drugs we’re not sure about, possibly while watching our bank account drain and our business go under, and all these media institutions you just watched lie to everyone’s face for years on end are aggressively saying you need to do this and support this or you’re a dangerous monster whose voice should be banned from social media.

How well do you imagine that would go over with you?

https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2021/08/04/after-russiagate-why-wouldnt-p
eople-be-skeptical-about-covid/#comment-68414

---

Quote:

---

Who Is Nina Jankowicz? Head of Joe Biden's Disinformation Governance Board

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THGRRI:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by G:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

FBI disagrees with CIA on Russian influence in the presidential election

The FBI did not corroborate the CIA’s claim that Russia had a hand in the election of President-elect Donald Trump in a meeting with lawmakers last week.

A senior FBI counterintelligence official met with Republican and Democrat members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in order to give the bureau’s view of a recent CIA report. The official did not concur with the CIA, frustrating Democrats. ... The different conclusions reached by the two intelligence agencies is a reflection of their different institutional styles. CIA officials often use past behavior and analysis based on gathered intelligence to advise leaders, whereas the FBI comes from a more legalistic background which relies on hard evidence to make a case.

---

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2016/12/12/fbi-disagrees-cia-russian-influ
ence-presidential-election-422763

Because who needs evidence when simple accusation will do?

I see a fight shaping up between the DIA and FBI on the one hand, and the CIA on the other.

---

So much to unpack:

1. At least your source bizpac, is upfront about their bias:

"Conservative News You Can Trust
Based in Palm Beach County, BizPac Review is a privately held, for-profit news and opinion website covering news that matters to conservatives throughout Florida and the United States."

2. This statement: "FBI disagrees with CIA on Russian influence in the presidential election" Disagrees how? Did bizpac say what specifically they disagreed on? No - they teased they would, but fishtailed away from being specific, only citing: "The different conclusions reached by the two intelligence agencies is a reflection of their different institutional styles." Ok, they're different entities so it's normal they would have different styles. On other words - BS article.

3. The money shot from the article only fizzles: "The official did not concur with the CIA, frustrating Democrats..."
Not no concur could mean ANYTHING. Did not think 1% was correct? It's wide open - again, a BS article.

4. Gathered Intelligence versus hard evidence? They're not the same? BS.

5. It is widely known that for many many years those 2 agencies have not played well together. That's messed up, but it explains why these 2 aren't slurping each other's work.

6. "The FBI did not corroborate the CIA’s claim that Russia had a hand in the election of President-elect Donald Trump in a meeting with lawmakers last week." Define: "had a hand in the election of President-elect Donald Trump." I'd like to see what the FBI thought had happened. Do they think there were no Russian hacks of the DNC or connection to Wikileaks? I really need to see a reputable source say that with facts to back it up before I would believe it.

7. It's easy to say Russia is being used by main stream media to sell papers/ads, but that would be true either way, so that proves nothing.

8. You have to ask: isn't it logical that Russia would want to influence our election? Of course.

9. Why would the CIA break a false story now? How would that change anything? What do they have to gain?

10. SIGNYM: "Because who needs evidence when simple accusation will do?"

OR, what you do:

"Because who needs evidence when Fake News will do?"

---

I see our Russian troll is still at it. With her it's spin, spin, spin.
____________________________________________

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I know that it's been mentioned in various threads, but I think that Biden's* Ministry of Truth demands its own thread. So, here it is.

Quote:

---

Who Is Nina Jankowicz? Head of Joe Biden's Disinformation Governance Board

---

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/who-is-nina-jankowicz-head-of-joe
-bidens-disinformation-governance-board/ar-AAWGYT5

I could provide horrifying example after horrifying example of Jankowicz (If this is Polish it's pronounced YANK-o-wich) spreading disinformation and censoring truth, but I'm running late, so please feel free to add.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Ynet in Israel is reporting that Israeli intelligence officials are deciding not to share intelligence with the incoming Trump administration. The report indicates they came to this conclusion after a recent meeting with American intelligence officials, who told them the Russians have "leverages of pressure" to use against Trump.
www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4906642,00.html

This is an extraordinary story. If our intelligence community really believes this, then playtime is over.

Nothing in the behavior of officials like Director of National Intelligence James Clapper or FBI chief James Comey has offered any clarity to the situation. Both appear determined to keep taking the fork in the road all the way to inauguration.

No more Clapper-style hedging or waffling. If Israel gets to hear why the CIA thinks Trump is compromised, how is the American public not also so entitled?

But if all the CIA has are unverifiable rumors, they can't do this, not even to Donald Trump.

The only solution is an immediate unveiling of all the facts and an urgent public investigation. A half-assed whispering campaign a half week from a Trump presidency, with BuzzFeed at the center of the action, isn't going to cut it. We need to know what the likes of Clapper and Comey know, and we need it all now, before it's too late.

www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/the-russia-story-reaches-a-cris
is-point-w460806

---

Quote:

---

Authored by Caitlin Johnstone via Medium.com,

Rightists have spent the last couple of days freaking out and invoking Orwell’s 1984 in response to something their political enemies are doing in America, and for once it’s for a pretty good reason.

The Department of Homeland Security has secretly set up a “Disinformation Governance Board”, only informing the public about its plans for the institution after it had already been established.

The disinformation board, which critics have understandably been calling a “Ministry of Truth”, purportedly exists to fight disinformation coming out of Russia as well as misleading messages about the US-Mexico border. We may be certain that the emphasis in the board’s establishment has been on the Russia angle, however.

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki, in her patented “You’re such a crazy idiot for questioning me about the White House” manner, dismissed alarmed questions about what specific functions this strange new DHS entity was going to be performing and what its authority will look like.

“It sounds like the objective of the board is to prevent disinformation and misinformation from traveling around the country in a range of communities,” Psaki said.

“I’m not sure who opposes that effort.”

PSAKI: "It sounds like the objective of the board is to prevent disinformation and misinformation from traveling around the country in a range of communities. I'm not sure who opposes that effort." pic.twitter.com/Z4xOv46RLT
— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) April 28, 2022

The answer to the question of “who opposes that effort” is of course “anyone with functioning gray matter between their ears.” No government entity has any business appointing itself the authority to sort information from disinformation on behalf of the public, because government entities are not impartial and omniscient deities who can be entrusted to serve the public as objective arbiters of absolute reality. They would with absolute certainty wind up drawing distinctions between information, misinformation and disinformation in whatever way serves their interests, regardless of what’s true, exactly as any authoritarian regime would do.

I mean, is anyone honestly more afraid of Russian disinformation than they are of their own government appointing itself the authority to decide what counts as disinformation?

This important point has gotten a bit lost in the shuffle due to the utterly hypnotic ridiculousness of the person who has been appointed to run the Disinformation Governance Board. Nina Jankowicz, a carefully groomed swamp creature who has worked in Kyiv as a communications advisor to the Ukrainian government as part of a Fulbright fellowship, is being widely criticized by pundits and social media users for her virulent Russiagating and whatever the hell this is:

You can just call me the Mary Poppins of disinformation ??????? https://t.co/eGV9lpctYn pic.twitter.com/WVQFA2bPmq
— Nina Jankowicz ???????? (@wiczipedia) February 17, 2021

Because of this person’s embarrassing cartoonishness, a lot more commentary lately has been going into discussing the fact that the Department of Homeland Security’s Ministry of Truth is run by a kooky liberal than the fact that the Department of Homeland Security has a fucking Ministry of Truth.

Which is really to miss the forest for the trees, in my opinion. Would it really be any better if the “Disinformation Governance Board” was run by a chill dude you wouldn’t mind having a beer with? Especially when we know the ideological leanings of this department are going to bounce back and forth between elections and will always act in service of US empire narrative control regardless of who is in office? I don’t think so.

The real issue at hand is the fact that this new institution will almost certainly play a role in bridging the ever-narrowing gap between government censorship and Silicon Valley censorship. The creation of the DHS disinformation board is a far more shocking and frightening development than last year’s scandalous revelation that the White House was advising social media platforms about accounts it determined were circulating censorship-worthy Covid misinformation, which was itself a drastic leap in the direction toward direct government censorship from what had previously been considered normal.

White House fact-sheet says part of the mammoth $33 billion spending package it's requesting for Ukraine will be to "support independent media." Because nothing screams "independent" like being directly funded by the US Government as part of its "information warfare" initiative pic.twitter.com/O3JshV1Mg9
— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) April 28, 2022

We should probably talk more about how as soon as people accepted that it was fine for government, media and Silicon Valley institutions to work together to censor misinformation and rally public support around an Official Narrative about a virus, the ruling power establishment immediately took that as license to do that with a war and a foreign government as well.

Like, immediately immediately. We went from a massive narrative control campaign about a virus, which people accepted because they wanted to contain a deadly pandemic, straight into a massive narrative control campaign about Russia and Ukraine. Without skipping a beat. Like openly manipulating everyone’s understanding of world events is just what we do now. Now we’re seeing increasingly brazen censorship of political dissent about a fucking war that could easily end up getting us all killed in a nuclear holocaust, and a portion of the Biden administration’s whopping $33 billion Ukraine package is going toward funding “independent media” (read: war propaganda).

We should probably talk more about this. We should probably talk more about how insane it is that all mainstream western institutions immediately accepted it as a given that World War II levels of censorship and propaganda must be implemented over a faraway war that our governments are not even officially a part of.

It started as soon as Russia invaded Ukraine, without any public discussion whatsoever. Like the groundwork had already been laid and everyone had already agreed that that’s what would happen. The public had no say in whether we want to be propagandized and censored to help the US win some kind of weird infowar to ensure its continued unipolar domination of the planet. It just happened.

No reason was given to the public as to why this must occur, and there was no public debate as to whether it should. This was by design, because propaganda only works when you don’t know it’s happening to you.

The choice was made for us that information is too important to be left in the hands of the people. It became set in stone that we are to be a propaganda-based society rather than a truth-based society. No discussion was offered, and no debate was allowed.

In the middle of an election campaign, Defence Minister Peter Dutton tells Australians to "prepare for war". He compared China with Nazi Germany in the 1930s. Australia has no enemies, none, zero. But it speaks for its master in Washington. Read on: https://t.co/dSRhu5b23i
— John Pilger (@johnpilger) April 25, 2022

And as bad as it is, it’s on track to get much, much worse. They’re already setting up “disinformation” regulation in the government which presides over Silicon Valley, the proxy war between the US and Ukraine is escalating by the day, and aggressions are ramping up against China over both the Solomon Islands and Taiwan. If you think imperial narrative management is intense now, wait until the US empire’s struggle to secure global hegemony really gets going.

Do you consent to this? Do you? It’s something you kind of have to take a position on, because its implications have a direct effect on our lives as individuals and on our trajectory as a society. How much are we willing to sacrifice to help the US win an infowar against Russia?

The question of whether we should abandon all hope of ever becoming a truth-based society and committing instead to winning propaganda wars for a globe-spanning empire is perhaps the most consequential decision we’ve ever had to make as a species. Which is why we weren’t given a choice. It’s just been foisted upon us.

Whoever controls the narrative controls the world. By taking our control of information out of our hands without asking our permission and determining for us that we are to be a propaganda-based civilization for the foreseeable future, they have stolen something sacred from us. Something they had no right to take.

Nothing about the state of the world tells us that the people who run things are doing a good job. Nothing about our current situation suggests they should be given more control, rather than having control taken away from them and given to the people. We are going in exactly the wrong direction.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
I put an asterisk after Biden's* name bc Biden* isn't in charge. He's a meat puppet, so when I refer to him* I'm using shorthand for the collective that is managing him.

---