Steve CoxKonto zweryfikowane

Not surprisingly, none of this has gotten much attention from CNN, NBC, etc, all of which are "all-in" on the fake Trump/Russia narrative.

Then, two days ago, this comes out (it was actually first reported in October of 2016 by another source): https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/world/national-security/clinton-campaign-dnc-paid-for-research-that-led-to-russia-dossier/2017/10/24/226fabf0-b8e4-11e7-a908-a3470754bbb9_story.html …

And in a world where retractions *used* to be rare, with mainstream press, they've all printed dozens now. Always from the exact same angle:

It's always a retraction of a point that bolsters the Trump/Russia narrative. That should be alarming. Examples here https://theintercept.com/2017/09/28/yet-another-major-russia-story-falls-apart-is-skepticism-permissible-yet/ …

One example of many: It was never "17 agencies agree". It was 3. The reason they said 17 was James Clapper, head of intelligence, said it.

So, since he oversees 17 agencies, they just went with it. And the thing is, he's a proven liar. He testified to congress that the govt...

wasn't collecting bulk Intel on Americans, prompting @Snowden to collect the proof and reveal it months later. Why believe Clapper?