I'm very annoyed that I even had to write this blog post, as it's a compete waste of time, and I have a new appreciation of the term "busy work". The daily ridiculous conspiracy stories coming out about Donald Trump and his administration are exhausting, and many of hem completely fake - MANY TRUE! (but many more fake) Do I support Trump? Of course not, you git, I'm a pinko-commie-Canadian covered by universal healthcare, and I'm sick and tired of my TV and Radio being saturated with Donald Trump, and crazy conspiracy stories that are easily debunked with minor research, especially when someone has already done the work yesterday, but some people don't think the dead horse has been flogged enough. Just stop it people. Stop the crazy.
There is a rumour suggesting a Russian knew (or requested publicly) who would/should have their US security clearance revoked, before Donald Trump announced it. This is completely and undeniably false, based on a timeline of events (all credit to Daniel Dale of the Toronto Star https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1030122540822405121)
2018-07-24 07:13 DST (Ottawa-time):
Here we have Artem Klyushin, a Russian supporter of Putin, calling out the people that Trump will name in two days, who will be losing their clearance - THIS IS PROOF OF COLLUSION*. How could he possibly know who Trump was going to name two days later?!
*No, it's not.
To expand on this for all to see and understand;
Sarah Sanders lists the SAME PEOPLE during the White House press briefing LESS THAN A DAY BEFORE here:
Philip Bump, Washington Post, 2018-07-23
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/07/23/trump-can-revoke-critics-security-clearances-if-he-wants-but-it-likely-wouldnt-change-much/
Artem Klyushin reads English, and he has the internet. He woke up, read the news, and found out himself, possibly from the Washington Post, the names of these individuals. This is not hard to believe, at all. "Truthers" who are still flogging this story are sticking to their guns, claiming that even if the timeline of events refutes the "proof", there can be no doubt this was evidence of a Russian connection, and time isn't really a fact at all, it's just an opinion - or something.
I cannot tell you how fed up I am of debunking this garbage. I really do have better things to do. Pardon me, there's a ship story that needs debunking.
There is a rumour suggesting a Russian knew (or requested publicly) who would/should have their US security clearance revoked, before Donald Trump announced it. This is completely and undeniably false, based on a timeline of events (all credit to Daniel Dale of the Toronto Star https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1030122540822405121)
2018-07-24 07:13 DST (Ottawa-time):
Here we have Artem Klyushin, a Russian supporter of Putin, calling out the people that Trump will name in two days, who will be losing their clearance - THIS IS PROOF OF COLLUSION*. How could he possibly know who Trump was going to name two days later?!*No, it's not.
Экс-директоры ЦРУ Джон Бреннан и Майкл Хэйден, экс-директор ФБР Джеймс Коми и его заместитель Эндрю МакКейб, экс-директор Национальной разведслужбы Джеймс Клаппер, экс-советник по нацбезопасности Сьюзан Райс прощаются с доступами к секретным материалам. Welcome to the real world! pic.twitter.com/nBr8zlZeyR— АРТЕМ КЛЮШИН (@ARTEM_KLYUSHIN) 24 July 2018
To expand on this for all to see and understand;
 |
| Washington Post, 2018-07-23 |
Philip Bump, Washington Post, 2018-07-23
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/07/23/trump-can-revoke-critics-security-clearances-if-he-wants-but-it-likely-wouldnt-change-much/
Analysis: Trump can revoke critics’ security clearances if he wants — but it likely wouldn’t change much https://t.co/dAiYkBgbcO— Washington Post (@washingtonpost) July 23, 2018
Artem Klyushin reads English, and he has the internet. He woke up, read the news, and found out himself, possibly from the Washington Post, the names of these individuals. This is not hard to believe, at all. "Truthers" who are still flogging this story are sticking to their guns, claiming that even if the timeline of events refutes the "proof", there can be no doubt this was evidence of a Russian connection, and time isn't really a fact at all, it's just an opinion - or something.
I cannot tell you how fed up I am of debunking this garbage. I really do have better things to do. Pardon me, there's a ship story that needs debunking.
No comments:
Post a Comment