CNN reports Clinton met random hiker in photo

[Sunburn74]

That is simply not credible. Alex Jones level stuff here.

Nothing has been confirmed or verified as being accurate.

Lock the thread please. Again debating the existence of Bigfoot doesn't do anyone any good.

 

[woolfe9998]

4) CNN exposes themselves staging upset protester using own camera man

https://youtu.be/eOCcRnvMPEU

LOL, they "exposed themselves staging" it. The anchor disclosed in the broadcast that he had met the guy before. Funny that, a news outlet "stages" an angry protester, who comes across like a fool by the way, then directly tells their viewers, look, we just staged this. Hilarious.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Sheik, I know the wound is still fresh but cmon. Just read wikileaks if you want the source. CNN is as corrupt as they come, how anyone can think they're a credible, "unbiased" source of news is laughable.

1) List of reporters who attended an "off the record" dinner with Podesta including a gaggle of CNN reporters:
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/12063
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/23958

• The first link is the list of media personalities who went to the "off the record" private party in the personal home of John Podesta. Includes many corrupt, in-the-tank-for-Hillary journalists like John Heillman, Mark Halperin, Maggie Haberman (colluding in other emails with the Hillary campaign) and many others (Diane Sawyer, George Stephanopoulos, Mika Brzezinski, and so many more).
  
  
• The largest amount of invitees who said yes to the private party are from the New York Times, Bloomberg, MSNBC, and CNN. Seems to nicely reflect the level of corruption and pro-Hillary bias. This is April 2015 so they were influencing journalists for a long time and their investment has clearly paid off.

2) Chris Cuomo - "We (CNN) couldn't help her any more than we already have!"
https://youtu.be/M9zMwOQMNYM
-It's illegal for you to read wikileaks but not the media.
https://youtu.be/7DcATG9Qy_A

3) CNN giving asking the DNC for questions to give to Trump, Cruz, Fiorina:
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/27526
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/23554

4) Donna Brazile getting CNN debate questions in advance:

• https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5205
  
  
• https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/39807
  
  
• https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/38478
  
  
• “From time to time I get the questions in advance… Here’s one that worries me about HRC [death penalty].”
  
  
• "I rarely hear it. I'll send a few more. Though some questions Roland submitted"
  
  
• "One of the questions directed to HRC tomorrow is from a woman with a rash"
  
  
• "Her family has lead poison and she will ask what, if anything, will Hillary do as president to help the ppl of Flint."

Here's the thing speedy, you're a coward, and you disappeared when things got rough for drumpf, you tucked tail and ran. I will not, I am here, will be here to call out drumpf on his many, many, many, many faults. My candidate lost in the primary, and as a middle aged white male, I doubt drumpf and his ilk are going to come gunning for me. But he has threatened to do many things, several of them would qualify as war crimes, and I am not anywhere near ok with that.
I question wikileaks motives and and see very little corroboration from credible sources outside of them. They have an agenda, and it's patently transparent. Their agenda fits with your agenda so it all washes out for you.
again I say, you, are a coward. when your candidate was getting hit hard, you ran away, for a month or more. while hillary wasn't MY candidate, I did, indeed vote for her, technically I voted against drumpf, and she was the best shot to keep him out, unfortunately it didn't turn out that way.
And on day 2, drumpf has already filled that drained swamp with political insiders, how does that feel? Day 2 he breaks his promise. I'm gonna guess it burns, and chafes, and you better keep some balm handy, because I think this is only the beginning.

 

[buckshot24]

Nothing has been confirmed or verified as being accurate.

Lock the thread please. Again debating the existence of Bigfoot doesn't do anyone any good.

I fabricate an email of you saying damaging things of somebody and you don't say anything about it being a lie? Not credible. Alex Jones would be proud of you though.

 

[baydude]

That is debatable. No one has confirmed accuracy or that content wasn't altered especially when it's clearly done for political purposes against once side. They can basically put anything in those emails and claim it came from Clinton camp.

Lock the thread please. Tired of debating the existence of bigfoot with these jackasses.

You should educate yourself on the technology used to verify the authenticity of emails. Here's some info on DKIM verification for emails:
http://blog.erratasec.com/2016/10/politifact-yes-we-can-fact-check-kaines.html?m=1#.WA4KvvkrIdV

Also, lock the thread because there are people who don't agree with you? Just because you let your opinion be persuaded by what the media reports to you, doesn't mean everyone else has to. In fact it's obvious they don't, hence the increasing exposure of CNN, other MSM and DNC.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

I fabricate an email of you saying damaging things of somebody and you don't say anything about it being a lie? Not credible. Alex Jones would be proud of you though.

are you ok? because alex jones is/was a voice for the fuckwits on the far right, the conspiracy nutwads
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/for...alex-jones-most-unhinged-conspiracy-theories/

maybe you've gotten yourself a little to worked up over cheeto jesus winning.

 

[buckshot24]

are you ok? because alex jones is/was a voice for the fuckwits on the far right, the conspiracy nutwads
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/for...alex-jones-most-unhinged-conspiracy-theories/

maybe you've gotten yourself a little to worked up over cheeto jesus winning.

I know who Alex Jones is. Is this you not being a bully? You don't like Trump because he was a bully but this kind of name calling is ok?

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

I know who Alex Jones is. Is this you not being a bully? You don't like Trump because he was a bully but this kind of name calling is ok?

yea, I can live with that. do you need a safe space? And drumpf being a bully, was only one of many, many, many reasons I don't like him. It's somewhere in the middle. Maybe upper middle.

 

[Sunburn74]

I fabricate an email of you saying damaging things of somebody and you don't say anything about it being a lie? Not credible. Alex Jones would be proud of you though.

I don't need to say anything.

What defense can someone have against people who are willing to steal and fabricate data but not give their names as they are doing it?

my argument isn't even about how much was fabrication vs unaltered but rather that you shouldn't be gullible sheep and expect that people who badly want you to believe in Bigfoot when they show you or emails about Bigfoot from the government mentioned aren't being totally honest.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

I don't need to say anything.

What defense can someone have against people who are willing to steal and fabricate data but not give their names as they are doing it? If you're willing to steal data for political purposes, you're probably willing to fabricate it. I mean there isn't exactly a code of ethics regarding the use of stolen documents. I don't discount the existence of the wikileaks emails but what I say wasn't that bad (showed the Clinton campaign as being very calculating), was most expected, and totally unverifiable.

my argument isn't even about how much was fabrication vs unaltered but rather that you shouldn't be gullible sheep and expect that people who want to to believe in Bigfoot when they show you or emails about Bigfoot from the government mentioned aren't being totally honest.

The code of ethics made me think of this

 

[flexy]

LOCK THIS THREAD!
LOCK THIS THREAD!

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

LOCK THIS THREAD!
LOCK THIS THREAD!

Yea, what you did there. I saw it

 

[LegendKiller]

Yes, but why would CNN intentionally run a false story, risking their credibility, for that purpose alone? Assuming for the sake of argument that they are biased in Hilary's favor, they might run a fraudulent story to actually help her win, but for this purpose? No way. At most they were misled.

Try to recover it somewhat so that Chelsea can run.

 

[LegendKiller]

LOL, they "exposed themselves staging" it. The anchor disclosed in the broadcast that he had met the guy before. Funny that, a news outlet "stages" an angry protester, who comes across like a fool by the way, then directly tells their viewers, look, we just staged this. Hilarious.

Then why air it at all? It was staged, period. Now why?

How about trying to gain some "credibility" back.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Try to recover it somewhat so that Chelsea can run.

please no, enough of the whole legacy thing.

 

[FerrelGeek]

This post is truly sad. The old hag is a total sham; get over it.

Where is the proof that the lady was a staffer? SHOW IT?!

The below picture only shows that the lady (which we already know lives near their house) in the past attended a fund raiser where Clinton was too, and obviously she's a fan of her.

While I agree that it seems odd to me that Clinton would just happen to run through the woods like this, it's still somewhat possible this happened.

 

[dank69]

What is the end goal of running this story? Makes no damn sense.

 

[buckshot24]

I don't need to say anything.

What defense can someone have against people who are willing to steal and fabricate data but not give their names as they are doing it?

my argument isn't even about how much was fabrication vs unaltered but rather that you shouldn't be gullible sheep and expect that people who badly want you to believe in Bigfoot when they show you or emails about Bigfoot from the government mentioned aren't being totally honest.

Nobody contested the accuracy of the emails. That wouldn't have happened if they were fabricated.

 

[SP33Demon]

I don't need to say anything.

What defense can someone have against people who are willing to steal and fabricate data but not give their names as they are doing it?

my argument isn't even about how much was fabrication vs unaltered but rather that you shouldn't be gullible sheep and expect that people who badly want you to believe in Bigfoot when they show you or emails about Bigfoot from the government mentioned aren't being totally honest.

Guys, what's a google DKIM key?
Oh wait, Debbie Wasserman resigned because of nothing. Fake my ass.