CNN Producer Admits They Have No Proof - Trump Is Good For Business

a reply to: Wookiep

One employee is not CNN.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Wookiep

One employee is not CNN.

Shhh don't destroy their narrative.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Unles that employee is the CEO who comes down from his ivory tower to issue directions that are leading everyone straight into a wall.

'Jeff, Do You Even Care?'

a reply to: knowledgehunter0986

It's crap.
It's not any kind of vindication.
It's one person.
Even ten people saying it on camera wouldn't make it true.
The investigation is real
It's not going away.
It just isn't...

a reply to: Sillyolme

I imagine Trumps grabbed a few Miss Piggy's privates in his time .

a reply to: carewemust

Chief?
Did he #ing say chief?
What a blowhard Hannity is.
The guys a step above best boy on the production crew .
Chief.
Oh My Gawd....
My sides hurt from laughing.

I mean really guys...really.. too, too
Funny.

all this proves to me is that trump is better at covering his butt than we gave him credit for. its not hard to obfuscate stuff when you own the people paid to investigate you. i think that if trump is going to screw up, he is going to do it without our help or encouragement. wait and see, folks. wait and see.

a reply to: Sillyolme

you're making so many unreasonable implications that i don't even know where to begin. let's see:

The medical segment producer who has nothing to do with the news segments. At all. Ever...

> implying that just because he's a medical examiner, he has no idea what his fellow employees and CEOs are up to (even though he's explicitly stating the direction his entire team was given, including himself).

You guys will grasp on to the weakest straws. This one is very weak, broken even.

> implying that this isn't the most damning thing to happen to CNN in its entire history

> implying that CNN doesn't take this seriously, even though they can shut down this entire organization for fraudulent misrepresentation of its employees

> implying that the russian-trump connection has anything to grab onto (LOL)

One person... I can find twelve who believe in fairies for cryin' out loud.

> implying that someone who works for CNN and believes in fairies is the equivalent of working for CNN and believing (based on first hand facts and working experience) the entire russian-trump/russian election narrative is completely baseless

> implying that he's the only person to think so, when VJ stated the exact same thing

Pathetic attempt to make the story go away. Or make it not true.

> implying that Project Veritas has some kind of obvious, but also very hidden agenda to help Trump's presidency

> implying that Project Veritas is working with russia

But it's real and it's not going away . It's expanding.

> implying that it's expanding based on facts and not baseless assertions

Getting bigger every day with investigating secret communication back channels and dealings with sanctioned banned banks and bankers who trained for the GRU.

> implying that "investigating secret communication back channels" is only something the Trump campaign has done

> implying that "secret back channels" prove russians helped Trump win the election (not understanding that the tone of the investigators would be speaking in definites and not under the guise of "allegations from someone close to the source")

And trying every way possible to get the investigation stopped or at the very least deligitimized it. It's all a very transparent attempt to make this go away.

> implying that they want the investigation to go away because of obvious guilt, and denying the possibility of a presidential administration trying to get rid of gridlock so they can focus on things that are real & actually matter

you've said nothing of substance that can tie trump or anyone in his cabinet to obvious criminality. none of what you just said gives reasonable credit to the idea that the trump administration colluded with russian agents.

a reply to: andy06shake

Oh..shiver.
The poor little piggies.

a reply to: facedye

> implying this is 4chan

God you're fun.

a reply to: Meee32

Are you doing that?

I imagine it depends on the time of day but I bet the same companies that advertise on Fox advertise on CNN.
Drug companies and lawyers bringing class action suits against drug companies mostly.
Oh and McDonald's.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Could be worse, he could be dishing out the David Cameron treatment, now that's some special attentions.

a reply to: Deaf Alien

oh good i'm glad you know what green text is outside of the context of ATS.

unfortunately your trolling post doesn't land very well, could use better delivery. using green text doesn't imply that this is 4chan. it's clearly not.

and at what point do you start focusing on the information instead of the messenger? do you only do that outside of the context of you being inaccurate and uninformed?

originally posted by: Nikola014
actual, concrete proof

Proof of what? A second rate medical producer at CNN who might not agree with the general direction his bosses have taken? OK, yes, you've caught him.

a reply to: facedye

Tee hee.
He didnt have a cabinet during the election cycle. And he WAS a total buffoon during the whole thing.
Just further proof of the effect that Russia had on the election that a perfectly capable if old school establishment candidate was pushed out by this... this....
Ahhh...

I'm ok I'm ok bobs head.
Anyway.
Yeah it's been this way with him and the media that exposes him since forever.

a reply to: redtic

Red handed lol.

a reply to: facedye

I have already told you that the video is BS and I have explained why. What more do you want?
And you thought you were being cute by turning this into 4chan.

a reply to: Deaf Alien

I have already told you that the video is BS and I have explained why. What more do you want?

again, you are heavily uninformed based on your explanation. it really looks like you're entirely unprepared to have this discussion.

a reply to: Sillyolme

unfortunately, what you just said will never, in any way, in any american court of law, under any legal american jurisdiction, count as proof of anything.

a reply to: facedye

Why are you resonding to me and not to others? A couple of posters made a good counter-point and you ignored them.
Gee I wonder why.