world

Trump gets third intel briefing, far fewer than predecessors

65 Comments
By DEB RIECHMANN

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2016 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

65 Comments
Login to comment

Trump gets third intel briefing, far fewer than predecessors

Trust issues?

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Trump must be bored already. Pres

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Trump gets third intel briefing, far fewer than predecessors

Good, there will be fewer intelligence failures during his tenure (hopefully)

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Certainly, if he was the "OMGod..Trump is Hitler!..he's gonna take over the world!" type that the lefties say he is, then he would eating those briefings for breakfast, like Obomber did.

Thank god the hegomons are finally out of direct power. Not that they're giving up though. The House of Representatives passed H. R. 5732 - "Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act of 2016” in mid November. Sponsored by a Dem, as I'm guessing as a back-up in case Hillary miraculously lost. Two points, 1. Accuses Syria of using chemical weapons which is a lie, and 2. Calling for a no-fly zone, which Killary would have done in her first few days in office.

So yeah! Don't trust them Donald. The MIC is so entrenched with the Dem/Rep cabal they will try to drag you into war, any war.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/5732/text?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%225732%22%5D%7D

-9 ( +2 / -11 )

Aldous Huxley wrote, "There are three kinds of intelligence, in descending order, human, animal and military."

Where does top-secret political intelligence come in this, I wonder.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

Pence is worse than Trump!

9 ( +11 / -2 )

Intelligence Officers: "Like, why bother?".

8 ( +9 / -1 )

Making Dubya look like Einstein, Donald.

11 ( +14 / -3 )

Kellyanne Conway, has insisted that Trump is engaged and utilizing information from multiple sources

. . . like Twitter, Breitbart, and Infowars.

11 ( +13 / -2 )

Don't feed the Monkey too many Bananas .

9 ( +11 / -2 )

AP: ... The relatively few briefings stand in contrast with Vice President-elect Mike Pence, who is getting nearly daily briefings. ...

Donald Trump, master delegator!

A President for the ages!

His predecessor B. Obama II destined to join that other leader-or-whatever with name starting with 'O': Ozymandias.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/11/29/americas-economy-before-obama-versus-after-obama/

America’s Economy Before Obama Versus After Obama - 29 Nov 2016

... “The president said the U.S. ‘is indisputably better off’ because of him, and those who voted for Trump “are better off than they were when I came into office for the most part,” CNS News reported. ... Breitbart News put President Obama’s claim to the test using eight key metrics of economic health ... Six of these eight metrics show that Americans are demonstrably worse off in November 2016 than they were in January 2009, when President Obama was inaugurated. ... The two metrics which show nominal improvement–the unemployment rate and median annual income–come with significant caveats. ... While the measured unemployment rate has declined under Obama, the dramatic increase in the number of those not participating in the labor force, and stagnant median household annual income in real terms, suggest that those two economic metrics represent illusory gains. ...

-11 ( +0 / -11 )

The relatively few briefings stand in contrast with Vice President-elect Mike Pence, who is getting nearly daily briefings.

Well, it looks like the establishment GOP got their president.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

"THE MSM is CORRUPT!"... Posts links to Breitbart. Doesn't see the irony.

9 ( +11 / -2 )

Strangerland: "THE MSM is CORRUPT!"... Posts links to Breitbart. Doesn't see the irony.

Posts why the MSM is corrupt, why Snopes is a fail. Crickets chirping.

Asks WHY NOT Breitbart? Crickets chirping.

-13 ( +0 / -13 )

Asks WHY NOT Breitbart? Crickets chirping.

Because it's entirely biased, and doesn't even remotely operate under a code of ethics. They are worse than the MSM the alt-right professes to hate.

13 ( +15 / -2 )

Provide facts to support your opinions on Breitbart, or they remain your opinions.

Not like the various studies and articles demonstrating bias in the media at large.

-11 ( +0 / -11 )

How about the Breitbart article last week that headlined their article last week with how the clinton campaign was doing a recount, but then the actual data in their article said that the Clinton campaign had been approached, not that they were doing anything, and that they had actually said they didn't see the need for a recount, even though the entire thing was nuanced the entire direction.

And yes, I know you're going to say 'but the clinton camp is part of the recount', but at the time, they weren't, and the contents of the Breitbart article, if you read past their nuance and rhetoric, agreed they weren't.

Nothing I say will convince you there is anything wrong with Breitbart. But you make yourself look foolish by criticizing the MSM while quoting Breitbart. It just shows you're a sheep for your own MSM.

9 ( +11 / -2 )

Intelligence briefing? Maybe it is just me, but "Trump" and "intelligence" seem like a self-contradiction.

10 ( +12 / -2 )

Post link before I'll look at it. Not from your memory. I read halfway through the first sentence of your post and stopped. No use to address your comment without a link to look at what you're complaining about.

-11 ( +0 / -11 )

The Donald is the best at the military despite his lack of any experience in that field.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Because he is intelligent enough already ;)

Or because he might tweet the nuclear codes for a laugh.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Pence is worse than Trump!

____________________________________________ If he helped leverage the Carrier deal all is forgiven.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/29/business/trump-to-announce-carrier-plant-will-keep-jobs-in-us.html

Trump to Announce Carrier Plant Will Keep Jobs in U.S.

From the earliest days of his campaign, Donald J. Trump made keeping manufacturing jobs in the United States his signature economic issue, and the decision by Carrier, the big air-conditioner company, to move 2,000 of them from Indiana to Mexico was a tailor-made talking point for him on the stump.

On Thursday, Mr. Trump and Mike Pence, Indiana’s governor and the vice-president elect, plan to appear at Carrier’s Indianapolis plant to announce they’ve struck a deal with the company to keep a majority of the jobs in the state, according to officials with the transition team as well as Carrier.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Post link before I'll look at it. Not from your memory.

Here is the story: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/11/22/clinton-campaign-looking-into-challenging-outcome-of-election-to-undermine-the-vote/

The claim: Clinton campaign 'looking into...' (active tense).

The article contents:

Reports from several sources revealed on November 22 that Clinton campaign chief John Podesta was taking meetings with a group claiming it had discovered “irregularities”

They were taking meetings from a group making claims. Passive tense.

Apparently a “group of prominent computer scientists and election lawyers” met with Podesta to express their belief that they “found persuasive evidence that results in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania may have been manipulated or hacked,”

Again, passive tense.

Then they even admit that (at the time) the Clinton campaign had dismissed the idea:

It is such a long shot that even the left’s favorite numbers guru, Nate Silver, essentially dismissed the effort.

The title of the article is not supported by the contents of the article, yet the article is written in a tone as if it does.

It doesn't take a lot of intelligence to see through the bias of Breitbart if you read their articles for what they are. It shows low intelligence to quote them as some sort of valid source, while at the same time condemning the MSM.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Really? So the article says that Hillary's campaign chief Podesta is meeting with activists who want to the challenge the vote with a recount, and you think that the headline "Clinton Campaign Looking into Challenging Outcome of Election to Undermine the Vote" isn't supported by the article?

Are all your complaints about Breitbart like that one?

Strangerland: Then they even admit that (at the time) the Clinton campaign had dismissed the idea:

(Breitbart) It is such a long shot that even the left’s favorite numbers guru, Nate Silver, essentially dismissed the effort.

How does 'the left' equate with 'the Clinton campaign'?

Nate Silver dismissing the idea does not mean the Clinton campaign dismissed it. He is not a spokesman for the campaign or even part of it, he's a nominally-independent pollster.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

Really? So the article says that Hillary's campaign chief Podesta is meeting with activists who want to the challenge the vote with a recount, and you think that the headline "Clinton Campaign Looking into Challenging Outcome of Election to Undermine the Vote" isn't supported by the article?

Exactly. It's not. Apparently you lack the intelligence to see how the article and the contents don't match, even after I spelled it out in my post.

Nothing will ever convince you that breitbart is not a valid new source.

You just look silly condemning the MSM while quoting Breitbart though.

But you're also the guy who believes the BS news articles that say that 3 million non-citizens voted for Hillary.

Baa baa sheep.

Moderator: Telling another reader "you lack the intelligence" is most impolite and well as arrogant. Add to that the fact that you continue to bicker with the other readers on a daily basis. You can have 24 hours off from posting. During this time, please refamiliarize yourself with the rules of the the discussion board.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

If Trump is going to put foreign policy and defense on autopilot, I can see benefits. I suspect he does not care too much about foreign policy, and his probability of messing things up and looking dumb are just too high. And who would dissuade him from just giving up military authority to someone else? I would love to hear Truman and MacArthur's opinions on the matter.

"Provide facts to support your opinions on Breitbart, or they remain your opinions.

Not like the various studies and articles demonstrating bias in the media at large."

This. Wow. I remember a time when the words "facts, opinions" and "studies, articles, bias" really meant something. I can't remember the last time I read an opinion, questioned it, and then found out it was backed up by a legitimate source or a legitimate scholar on a subject. I guess the problem is legitimacy. You know, pretty soon now, we are going to have Ted Cruz or somebody like Ted Cruz as a Supreme Court Justice. Are we going to quote that person as a legitimate legal scholar? Do we assume that the next Secretary of State can speak with legitimate authority about foreign policy? And the stuff that come out of the mouth of the President elect is informed by... what respectable, legitimate authority? You know, I did not even agree with Trump or his logic when he was firing people on the first season of the Apprentice.

I encourage everyone to start to be skeptical about EVERYTHING. Pretty soon, the legal field will be a battle ground populated mostly by graduates of Liberty Baptist College. Scientific studies will be published in fly by night journals or by research institutes funded by the billionaire du jour. And news articles? It is hard to say they are all "just as bad" but let's just say that news services are all equally vulnerable to squirting out garbage. I see it every day. I have seen wrong statements and out and out lies "backed up" by tens of "articles and studies." I hate to say this, I really do, but asking someone to support their opinion on the internet is simply a waste of time. This is 2016.

So legitimacy is society's problem. I recommend that the only cures are curiosity and skepticism. If you lose those, you are being herded by an idiot, and the idiot might be you.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

That's because you spelled out A = A and then claim "A = B

Nope. But I don't expect you to be able to see it.

Ask more people to look at your contention and see how many agree with you. You'll get some quizzical looks.

Not from anyone of intelligence.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Sounds like he's delegating. Good for him.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

It could also reflect some discomfort between Trump and the intelligence community.

So the president-elect is totally comfortable with the conspiracy theorist community, but uncomfortable with the intelligence community.

Good luck with that, America.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

Most political observers believed that once Trump received his intelligence briefings, he would realize the awesome responsibility of being president by seeing how scary the world is around us. Now he's practically ignoring them, and to me, that's really scary on many levels.

12 ( +13 / -1 )

Asks WHY NOT Breitbart?

This:

Gabby Giffords: The Gun Control Movement’s Human Shield

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/03/08/gabby-giffords-the-gun-control-movements-human-shield/

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Sounds like he's delegating. Good for him. you only delegate important jobs to others when you have NFI how to do them yourself.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

He's not busy enough to tweet himself - Trump transition team vice-chairman Newt Gingrich:

“The President of the United States can’t randomly tweet without having somebody check it out. It makes you wonder about whatever else he’s doing. It undermines much more than a single tweet.”

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Certainly, if he was the "OMGod..Trump is Hitler!..he's gonna take over the world!" type that the lefties say he is, then he would eating those briefings for breakfast, like Obomber did.

I've never heard of anyone fearing Trump would try to take over the world like Hitler. If you're referring to accusations from the left (and the right) of Trump using fascist propaganda tactics to get in, that's completely different (and absolutely true). Say what you will about Hitler, but he was no dummy. Trump on the other hand... I've said it before, but he seems more like another George W. Bush. And we all know how that went...

3 ( +4 / -1 )

"I've said it before, but he seems more like another George W. Bush. And we all know how that went..."

They are both ignorant but I never heard Bush say anything as ridiculously arrogant as knowing more than the experts in the area.

The definition of an educated person is knowing how ignorant you are. I hope Trump realizes how ignorant he truly is.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Watching Republicans trying to govern is so cute. It's like those Youtube videos of dogs pretending to drive a car.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

I hope Trump realizes how ignorant he truly is.

Don't hold your breath.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Trump is just a figurehead, and nothing more. They don't trust him with the big stuff -- hell, they barely trust him with himself and a Twitter account -- so they just ask him to sit back and relax.

8 ( +11 / -3 )

As an example, pressure builds on Trump to formalize (that is, sever) his relations with his companies, and he responds with a Tweet:

Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag - if they do, there must be consequences - perhaps loss of citizenship or year in jail!

This is the type of "Squirrel!" logic that my dog uses in two ways. First, he's now divided the debate into "loss of citizenship" or "year in jail," and the yahoos will argue about which would be more appropriate rather than whether the concept itself is totally insane (answer: yes).

Second, he's instigated his opponents to now go out and burn flags. This was heretofore not a problem; he would like to make it one precisely so that attention is diverted as he appoints his "swamp cabinet" and smarms out of separating his presidency from his private business interests. (Did you know that Trump will be violating his lease on his Washington hotel the moment he becomes president? No? Here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-dc-hotel_us_583ce1ffe4b06539a78a34fe But - look! Flag burners!)

My dog is not stupid - but he's still a dog.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Once again, President-elect Trump is correct in not listening to the current administration's Intel gurus -- ya know, the ones who can't even utter the phrase "radical Islamic terrorists" -- as their past prognostications were neither accurate nor reliable. Let them advise their current boss (if they can drag him off a golf course or away from a fundraiser) about the state of global affairs from a PC, alt left perspective. After all, he's done such a great job these past eight years making America and the world a safer place. . . .

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

I love some of the Pro Trump comments above - as if listening to experts is somehow a bad idea!?!....What else should he do? he doesn't read, spends all his time on Twitter being an idiot and relies on his "very good brain" for understanding an extremely complex and dangerous world...we are so stuffed, it's already happening - what some had predicted, he'll be the PR master who knows nothing about governing and he'll leave all the real work to Pence (a hard right politician) ....I don't think he ever really wanted the job and now he has it, Drumpf is overwhelmed

5 ( +6 / -1 )

This is the type of "Squirrel!" logic that my dog uses in two ways. First, he's now divided the debate into "loss of citizenship" or "year in jail," and the yahoos will argue about which would be more appropriate rather than whether the concept itself is totally insane (answer: yes).

Or maybe

We Trump supporters don't pat any attention to these tweets because we know that this is for the lefty "yahoo's" to get their panties in a bind. Seems to be working perfectly.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

We Trump supporters...

Wait - you're a Trump supporter, FizzBit? I thought you were an independent! Well, no matter - you and Romney are now in the same boat. Also, to say that Trump supporters do not pay attention to his Tweets is disingenuous; that's how he won the election, after all. Liberals only notice them after they're reported in the media. The game is getting old, though. Not only is the media catching on to the way they're being used, but so are people who on occasion think. Continuing this game after he assumes office is not an option. What will he do then?

(Start a war, I assume - the very thing you'd accused Clinton of planning. Oh, the irony!)

7 ( +7 / -0 )

We Trump supporters don't pat any attention to these tweets because we know that this is for the lefty "yahoo's" to get their panties in a bind. Seems to be working perfectly.

This is called rationalization. A particularly desperate example at that. Why on earth would he risk looking like a fool for such a petty and pointless reason? Seems to be working more to lock in his supporters if you ask me.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

"...So that concludes today's security briefing, Mr President-Elect. Do you have any questions, sir?"

"Yeah, how do you make these seats go up and down?"

(With apologies to Dan Quayle).

4 ( +4 / -0 )

One thing is sure;everything and anything Trump does, or doesn't do, will be vociferously criticized with all the hypocritical vitriol the lefty-loons can muster.

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

Frederic,

Have you ever considered for a second just why that would be?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Maybe it is just me, but "Trump" and "intelligence" seem like a self-contradiction

The word you're looking for is 'oxymoron'... which in the case of the current President-elect, has all the stress on the second pair of syllables.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

"Intelligence Officers: "Like, why bother?".

Yeah, after all, Hillary is going to be the next president anyway after the recounts, right?

"Pence is worse than Trump!"

He's way better than that idiot Hillary picked, Tim Kaine.

Frederic: "One thing is sure;everything and anything Trump does, or doesn't do, will be vociferously criticized with all the hypocritical vitriol the lefty-loons can muster."

theeastisred: "Have you ever considered for a second just why that would be?"

Because Hillary supporters are butt-hurt from losing the election even with the Obamas' support, Lady Gaga's support, Jay Z 's support, Madonna's support, Bruce Springsteen's support...

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

Trump is obviously do not know what is very meaning of intelligence briefs; if known he would read himself instead of asking Pence to handle.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

One thing is sure;everything and anything Trump does, or doesn't do, will be vociferously criticized with all the hypocritical vitriol the lefty-loons can muster.

Wow - what an amazing phenomenon! It is unprecedented in the history of America. The next thing you know, they'll be criticizing Trump for introducing ideas first brought up by the opposition - or even question his nationality. Oh, the outrage! How dare they!

1 ( +2 / -1 )

I'm getting the feeling that many Trump fans see his victory as a victory against the dreaded liberalism, and let's just say they are willing to sacrifice a lot for the little war going on in their minds. Reversing positions? No problem! Refilling the swamp? No problem! Skipping intelligence briefings? No problem!

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Trump released his foreign policy. He demands Japan to create better housing to all military men and dependents in all Japanese bases. Beside increasing annual payment to USA.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

hell, they barely trust him with himself and a Twitter account

HA! Classic!

2 ( +3 / -1 )

"Trump released his foreign policy. He demands Japan to create better housing to all military men and dependents in all Japanese bases."

That sounds like extra for the honest and already burdened Japanese taxpayer.

Talking of taxes and also avoidance of them, when are his tax returns going to turn up?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

It requires reading, which Trump avoids at all costs. Functional illiterate?

4 ( +4 / -0 )

The reason is that Trump has been spending too much time in tweeting at 4am and sleeps during day. You can go and check with Twitter.com and see how emotionally he has been melting down since three weeks ago. He knows he is not ready for this job shifting responsibility to Pence.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

The press article does not point out that these so-called intelligence briefings are prepared by the Obama/Clinton people... the same ones that have a disastrous string of foreign policy failures behind them. Missing those would be a plus.

But as I pointed out before, there is one thing I am sure the Trump haters in this forum will agree on: for the first time in 8 years, we have a critical press again.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Obama/Clinton people... the same ones that have a disastrous string of foreign policy failures behind them. Missing those would be a plus.

And those glorious rightest beliefs have done us so well. Blind faith in the GOP huh? Must be nice to believe all that. As long as it's the "us vs them" rhetoric GOP brown-noser's love to take as fact. The Republican party has lost all of it's soul. Money and powerr is their God.

While the outgoing Obama administration does have a lot of stupid choices on foreign policies, they've also happened to give the US some GOOD foreign policy. And economically it's been damned good for those making less than 150k USD a year.

As with all presidencies, both the good and bad will happen. Obama's admin has left the US with mostly good, Bush's admin left the US with mostly bad, And now the incoming Trump administration... doesn't really seem to be to bothered to do anything except support big business and the wealthy... I can already smell where this will leave us. A President elect that doesn't feel like doing his job. Serving the people as a public official? Doesn't look like he's at all interested buddy.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Missing those would be a plus.

Nah, I think we want our Pres to be informed with what's going on in the world. Don't lower the bar just because it's Trump.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

turbotsat: Asks WHY NOT Breitbart?

SenseNotSoCommon: This:

Gabby Giffords: The Gun Control Movement’s Human Shield

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/03/08/gabby-giffords-the-gun-control-movements-human-shield/

Basically what you're trying to say is that you don't like their opinion in an article unrelated to the topic at hand, and so all links from Breitbart must be invalid (or maybe it's even just their headline you don't like). Actually it's a way of getting out of addressing the validity of the article at the link first posted. When I declaim Snopes I actually point out the holes in their logic, usually missing information they conveniently didn't include.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

You can use Breitbart all you want, and people who know Breitbart will mostly ignore you. That's the part you are struggling with.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

SuperLib: ... and people who know Breitbart will mostly ignore you.

That's your assumption based on careful selection of your preferred class of people as 'people who know Breitbart'. My assumption is those same people (in your preferred class, not actually 'PWKBB') will post absurd youtube links with fake-serious labels, or drone on with fake silly numbers that weren't posted (re illegal voter counts) in response to links to peer-reviewed papers in Elsevier, or complain out-of-hand about Breitbart articles coming from Breitbart even when a BB article is mostly pasting text from MSM news outlets.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Look, I scan Breitbart quite often. And Fox News. Even Russia Today. And on the other side I go to HuffPo, Slate, and other left leaning sites. In the middle I browse CNN, then head over to the LA Times, and a few others. You just have to understand what you're getting from each. I know RT is Putin's view of events. HuffPo has turned far left since the election. Politico has been much more even tempered on the left.

When I read them, I'm conscious of who is talking to me. No matter how much underhandedness I see from some sites, there is always one or two crumbs of new information you can pick up. And you get to see what each side is being fed. I'm guessing you don't scan sites you disagree with very often. It shows.

Next, the whole "MSM" debate is dumb. Basically, if I don't get news from the same sources you do, then I'm just blinded by the MSM. It's pulled out instantly when anyone has a different opinion. And no one can even define what it is. Fox News followers play that card while at the same time touting their ratings. Can one of the largest sources of news be outside of whatever the MSM is?

One thing the respectable news companies do is vet stories. When you see some nutball theory from some fringe site saying it's being ignored by the MSM, maybe, just maybe, it's because it's a nutball theory that has no credibility. Just because the WSJ doesn't run it, it doesn't mean the WSJ is in on it. It just didn't meet their standards.

As for your evidence, it often fails to pass the credibility test. You use links from fringe sites to establish some baselines, then you fill the gap with your own imagination. You'll give us pages of links about non-citizen voting (the baseline), then pull some "80% voted for Clinton" finale (imagination). No, sorry, but you don't get to do that. You can't just put paperclips into the missing links between your evidence and conclusion.

I mean you can, but people will respond by questioning your credibility.

Finally, when you hop between both sides of the fence, people will remember. Your comment about the Trump supporter harassing passengers on a plane was, "Sounds like a false flag operation from Clinton." So I guess sometimes you'll be using Breitbart and paperclips, and other times you'll just be making accusations straight from your ass. I suppose it will be up to us to figure out which one you are using in any given thread.

As for the YouTube links, I'm just making fun of people who do that. It's satire. Something dictators do not allow.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@SuperLib ... the "80% voted for Clinton" was from a source that I linked, I didn't make the number up as you claim. The Clinton campaign's dirty tricks operations were exposed by sources, not me. Elsevier is not a fringe company, it's one of the world's top sources for scientific papers. etc., etc., etc. When you accuse someone of pulling accusations from somewhere, you ought to be able to provide examples, but you haven't. Like Strangerland, your contentions are not supported when you do try to counter with something approaching substantial, and it's obvious. Padding it with more words doesn't turn a nonsubstantial argument into something reasonable.

As far as the 'false flag' thing, I can make comments that are humorous, too. But the Clinton campaign left themselves open to that when they coordinated with Bob Creamer's operations. In this instance I was thinking of a similar video years ago, when (O'Keefe or someone similar) was following a self-professed Nazi around a Tea Party event and calling him out on pretending to be a Nazi in order to throw shade on the Tea Party. Creamer and his accomplice have already confessed on video to training and coordinating with false accusers. Even if they weren't involved with the fake Nazi or the loudly pro-Trump guy on the plane, they've only themselves to blame as they were involved in similar incidents.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites