Well, Well, Well--Trump proposes Secret Spy Net, Answerable Only to Him

[Meathead]

Original report:

Trump White House Weighing Plans for Private Spies to Counter “Deep State” Enemies

"The Intercept"? You've dug down to the bottom dregs of the internet and expect to be taken seriously.

Sites like this give CNN a wisp of integrity.

Actually, My OP was The Hill..I just thought that the original report would give the crowd more to go on.

I know. When you cite The Intercept you've pretty much simultaneously lost legitimacy and pointed out how hopelessly compromised and lunatic your thread is.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

Original report:

Trump White House Weighing Plans for Private Spies to Counter “Deep State” Enemies

"The Intercept"? You've dug down to the bottom dregs of the internet and expect to be taken seriously.

Sites like this give CNN a wisp of integrity.

Actually, My OP was The Hill..I just thought that the original report would give the crowd more to go on.

I know. When you cite The Intercept you've pretty much simultaneously lost legitimacy and pointed out how hopelessly compromised and lunatic your thread is.

***chuckles**
Or...I just want as much info out there..for those who actually read both articles--which I guess averages about 20%..give or take.

I get it that many of you are not used to intellectual honesty..but I do try to practice it..such as posting the White House rebuttal.

Instead of attacking the source..why not try attacking the content? For sure, I'm not saying it is true..just that it is something to watch..simple as that.

 

[Meathead]

Original report:

Trump White House Weighing Plans for Private Spies to Counter “Deep State” Enemies

"The Intercept"? You've dug down to the bottom dregs of the internet and expect to be taken seriously.

Sites like this give CNN a wisp of integrity.

Actually, My OP was The Hill..I just thought that the original report would give the crowd more to go on.

I know. When you cite The Intercept you've pretty much simultaneously lost legitimacy and pointed out how hopelessly compromised and lunatic your thread is.

***chuckles**
Or...I just want as much info out there..for those who actually read both articles--which I guess averages about 20%..give or take.

I get it that many of you are not used to intellectual honesty..but I do try to practice it..such as posting the White House rebuttal.

Instead of attacking the source..why not try attacking the content? For sure, I'm not saying it is true..just that it is something to watch..simple as that.

You should obviously more selective of your sources. I would no more link an article from Stormfront than from The Intercept since I respect neither and feel it would compromise whatever I argument or observation I would like to make anyway.

We all have our own standards I suppose.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

Original report:

Trump White House Weighing Plans for Private Spies to Counter “Deep State” Enemies

"The Intercept"? You've dug down to the bottom dregs of the internet and expect to be taken seriously.

Sites like this give CNN a wisp of integrity.

Actually, My OP was The Hill..I just thought that the original report would give the crowd more to go on.

I know. When you cite The Intercept you've pretty much simultaneously lost legitimacy and pointed out how hopelessly compromised and lunatic your thread is.

***chuckles**
Or...I just want as much info out there..for those who actually read both articles--which I guess averages about 20%..give or take.

I get it that many of you are not used to intellectual honesty..but I do try to practice it..such as posting the White House rebuttal.

Instead of attacking the source..why not try attacking the content? For sure, I'm not saying it is true..just that it is something to watch..simple as that.

You should obviously more selective of your sources. I would no more link an article from Stormfront than from The Intercept since I respect neither and fell it would compromise whatever I argument or observation I would like to make.

We all have our own standards I suppose.

True that..also true..that you have in no way addressed the content of either of the links..for me...that would be evasive and counter-productive. If the links are as bad as you say..than debunking them would be child's play.

But, as you say, we all have our own standards. The Hill usually is a bit left leaning..but factual--I'd never heard of the Intercept before today. I'll keep your caution in mind.

 

[Meathead]

"The Intercept"? You've dug down to the bottom dregs of the internet and expect to be taken seriously.

Sites like this give CNN a wisp of integrity.

Actually, My OP was The Hill..I just thought that the original report would give the crowd more to go on.

I know. When you cite The Intercept you've pretty much simultaneously lost legitimacy and pointed out how hopelessly compromised and lunatic your thread is.

***chuckles**
Or...I just want as much info out there..for those who actually read both articles--which I guess averages about 20%..give or take.

I get it that many of you are not used to intellectual honesty..but I do try to practice it..such as posting the White House rebuttal.

Instead of attacking the source..why not try attacking the content? For sure, I'm not saying it is true..just that it is something to watch..simple as that.

You should obviously more selective of your sources. I would no more link an article from Stormfront than from The Intercept since I respect neither and fell it would compromise whatever I argument or observation I would like to make.

We all have our own standards I suppose.

True that..also true..that you have in no way addressed the content of either of the links..for me...that would be evasive and counter-productive. If the links are as bad as you say..than debunking them would be child's play.

But, as you say, we all have our own standards. The Hill usually is a bit left leaning..but factual--I'd never heard of the Intercept before today. I'll keep your caution in mind.

Why would you think I would bother refuting anything written by some sleazy internet site.

Just for fun, refute this about life on Jupiter:

The Worlds of David Darling

 

[BlindBoo]

Make sure there are lots of fire extinguishers at the Capital building just in case of a fire. Just saying......