Q: Shouldn't we trust the Intelligence Agencies?

From iGeek
Jump to: navigation, search
RussiaCollusion4.jpg
NO! Being rationally skeptical is called critical thinking. So as Reagan said, "trust but verify". If the evidence supports the case, and they're being open? Sure. If they're not being open, and the story doesn't add up, then "of course not". The FBI is normally about telling the truth, but the CIA's job is to lie. And both the top of the FBI and CIA, in this case, have been caught lying, politicking (against this administration), the top leadership has been fired and are being investigated. Thus the media and democrats that have been telling us since Vietnam to never trust the CIA, are suddenly saying we should trust unnamed agency sources without evidence (and without question)? That doesn't sound political to you? These are the folks that:
  1. didn’t see 9/11 coming
  2. that empowered the "Bush lied" falsehood with “WMD’s were a slam dunk”
  3. who was wrong on ISIS/Caliphate and said it was, "unfathomable to think ISIS could establish a caliphate in the Middle East”, and Obama confirmed later that, "ISIS was not on my intelligence radar screens” while pulling us out of Iraq (and enabling them to get a toehold)
  4. the same CIA director that helped in draft the ill-fated Benghazi talking points (that the attack was a “spontaneous — not a premeditated” protest)
  5. the same ones that caught texting about insurance policies against Trump, and had multiple people fired for abuse of power, corruption, fraud and lies?

So if you always or never trust the agencies, then you're a loon (rube or conspiracy kook). Follow the evidence and behavior. The evidence around this whole thing has been so tainted by the Obama administrations abuses of power, and using cronies to do their bidding, that you'd be fool (or a Democrat) to blindly trust them on this.

MORE

  • Also remember that there was a ton of evidence contradicting the Russian narrative, but that wasn't getting as much attention. Like UK intelligence asset that said he carried the leaks from a disgruntled Bernie supporter to Assange. (Shhhh).
  • And finally the narrative is switching to Comey was at fault. Not for protecting Hillary from Crimes, or allowing the DOJ to illegally share information during an investigate in tarmac meetings about grandkids -- but because he admitted to the people that he'd found MORE evidence of Hillary breaking the law, and they were investigating excuses for why not to prosecute her for that.

Russiagate : DNC-Russian CollusionIG DOJ FBI ReportQ: Did Russia "influence" our elections?Q: Did Russia hack our election?Q: Did the Russians want Donald Trump to win?Q: Is Collusion a crime?Q: Is Trump compromised by Russians?Q: What about Helsinki?Q: What about Russian trolls, and Social Media?Q: What about the Podesta email hacks?Q: What is this Russia thing about?Q: What should we do about the Russian interference?Q: Who was the leadership during the Russiagate stuff?Q: Why did Russia interfere?Russia, Trump and WiretappingRussiagateRussians ads swung the 2016 electionTrump-Russia CollusionTrump: Russian Collusion
Russiagate People : James ClapperJames Comey