Russian hacking
- Thread starter Monnkai
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Lets look at some MORE "rest of the story".
The New York Times was given PROOF this story was false, but printed it anyway.
1. New York Times was given PROOF the story was false, but printed it anyway.
Before New York Times and Washington post printed this story, The RNC (Republican National Convention) presented the New York Times with "conclusive proof" that the story was false, and they they had bad intel... but these two biased papers printed the story anyway.
Spicer Says Russians Never Hacked The RNC, Reports Are False | The Daily Caller
2. Sean Spicer, Communications Director of the RNC, explains on CNN the story is false... but the New York Times ignores the facts.
“The intelligence is wrong,” Spicer told Smerconish. “It didn’t happened. We offered the New York Times conclusive proof that it didn’t happen. They ignored it. They refused to look at it because it didn’t fit the narrative.”
Here it is reviewed in print.
Spicer Says Russians Never Hacked The RNC, Reports Are False | The Daily Caller
3. How Biased is New York Times?
The New York Times is so biased that, right after the election, the EXECUTIVE EDITOR actually PRINTED AN APOLOGY to EVERYONE for being biased.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/13/u...-the-publisher-and-executive-editor.html?_r=0
"...we aim to rededicate ourselves to the fundamental mission of Times journalism. That is to report America and the world honestly..."
4. If you've still missed it, here is the whole interview on CNN, explaining this story is false.
[video=youtube;QR-uBdeEVF8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QR-uBdeEVF8&feature=youtu.be[/video]
Would it REALLY be that hard to report things fairly, or honestly?
The New York Times was given PROOF this story was false, but printed it anyway.
1. New York Times was given PROOF the story was false, but printed it anyway.
Before New York Times and Washington post printed this story, The RNC (Republican National Convention) presented the New York Times with "conclusive proof" that the story was false, and they they had bad intel... but these two biased papers printed the story anyway.
Spicer Says Russians Never Hacked The RNC, Reports Are False | The Daily Caller
2. Sean Spicer, Communications Director of the RNC, explains on CNN the story is false... but the New York Times ignores the facts.
“The intelligence is wrong,” Spicer told Smerconish. “It didn’t happened. We offered the New York Times conclusive proof that it didn’t happen. They ignored it. They refused to look at it because it didn’t fit the narrative.”
Here it is reviewed in print.
Spicer Says Russians Never Hacked The RNC, Reports Are False | The Daily Caller
3. How Biased is New York Times?
The New York Times is so biased that, right after the election, the EXECUTIVE EDITOR actually PRINTED AN APOLOGY to EVERYONE for being biased.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/13/u...-the-publisher-and-executive-editor.html?_r=0
"...we aim to rededicate ourselves to the fundamental mission of Times journalism. That is to report America and the world honestly..."
4. If you've still missed it, here is the whole interview on CNN, explaining this story is false.
[video=youtube;QR-uBdeEVF8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QR-uBdeEVF8&feature=youtu.be[/video]
Would it REALLY be that hard to report things fairly, or honestly?
Last edited:
This is not really about what has or hasn't happened. This is about how easily some people accepts foreign powers to manipulate them. Some people on here are more than happy to accept foreign meddling if it fits into their narrative. But of course, they could be joking
.
.
That's not what this is about.
This is about ME, presenting YOU, with TONS of LINKS and DOCUMENTATION...
and you rebut that by IGNORING ALL EVIDENCE, and giving your OPINION.
Opinion isn't evidence.
As far as I know, opinion has NEVER been evidence.
Hugs.
This is not really about what has or hasn't happened. This is about how easily some people accepts foreign powers to manipulate them. Some people on here are more than happy to accept foreign meddling if it fits into their narrative. But of course, they could be joking.
.