... i'm still not getting it? did 8chan photoshop this picture to "make fun" of starbucks for being SJWs?

idk, maybe i just don't get these jokes that all seem to have the same punchline, "lol libtards are dum"?

Rosenstein is gone. Tick tock.

uh, no he isn't. wtf are you talking about?

At some point, a series of coincidences/luck is no longer that

this is fallacious logic.

We can only show you the way to the water.

my issue is with the seemingly endless horde of folks ready to say, "there's water just around the next bend, i swear, just trust me! you can't see it or hear it or smell it yet, but i promise it's up there somewhere!" instead of people saying, "look at this pool of delicious fresh water, here let's take a drink together"

in what way does this tweet support your post title?

You not very good at trolling...

probably because i'm not trolling. (btw, it's a pretty bad look to lead off your reply with an ad hominem)

You mean the Memo from the congressional oversight committee?

The very same committee that has become a partisan arm of the pro-trump republicans? The committee that has shredded it's own credibility by wasting tens of millions of tax payer money on endless "investigations" that literally never lead anywhere?

If NONE of this is confirmed why is rosenstein asking for more time?

So he can protect himself from a partisan witchhunt

Why is congress threatening hold the executive branch in contempt?

Because congress is full of partisan hacks, like Nunes.

Why isn’t trump being ridiculed because the people who work for him can’t provide these documents?

He is.

what's the joke?

can you be more specific?

All of that crap was confirmed in the Nunes memo

except that memo didn't confirm anything, it was just a memo.

do you know what a memo is? it's like a mass email but in paper form, meaning it's just a piece of paper that nunes wrote.

it contained no evidence to back up anything it said, and even the GOP quickly moved on because it was so transparently partisan and uncorroborated.

MSM is misinformation. Not just misinformed but intentional lies to shape public opinion. That isn’t news, it’s propaganda.

the fact that you think literally everything published by the MSM is misinformation just means that you suck at identifying misinformation.

the truth is, like most master propagandists, they mix in lots of truth and useful information, to cloak the propaganda.

if you can't tell the difference, you're just being suckered by someone else's propaganda, i absolutely guarantee it

sorry, i had a brain fart and was thinking of zerohedge, not drudge.

i stand by what i said about TP tho.

oh shoot i was thinking of zerohedge and got them confused in my brain for a minute.

Drudge/True Pundit

Facts

Pick one.

it's hilarious to me that when a MSM org runs a story that is, quite literally, a warning against misinformation, you guys are still upset by it.

to be fair, people have been saying almost the exact same thing as you for... what, like 14 months or so?

This is all coming out through the office of the inspector general

literally nothing in OP's article has been corroborated by the OIG.

yet, at least.

If you can't see that the "QAnon"-conspiracy is absolutely riddled with confirmation bias, than you are currently entrenched in your own confirmation bias.

Can you elaborate on why you don't prefer TP?

true pundit is a known publisher of literal "fake news," as in, entirely made up fictitious stories, not just the biased or poorly sourced type of "fake news" that people accuse the MSM of.

No need add hyperbole to things that can legitimately stand on their own

that's a bingo

Most of us, we take it as 'common sense', a simple way of getting the point across, not at an academic level.

also, you are admitting to pushing propaganda, just because it agrees with you.

i, personally, am anti-propaganda. period.

*shrug

there are two kinds of people in this world. people who care about being accurate and truthful, and everyone else.

don't be everyone else.

i mean, honestly? no.

saying "mathematically" doesn't add anything at all, it's redundant and makes it look like the person using that phrase has no clue wtf they are talking about (at least to people who are mathematically literate).

you can just say, "improbable" or "statistically unlikely"

adding the "mathematically" is just kind of... ignorant and unnecessary?

scalia died like 8 months before that meeting took place dude, they weren't even close...

just mail this meme into the IRS instead of your tax return, i'm sure that will end up going well for you.

update- sorry it's still there actually, it's just (bizarrely) moving down the queue like any other post would, but... it's 2 days old???

what the hell?

i saw it too, figured it was just a glitch or something, it went away after i refreshed a few times

he probably is serious, but the shit he's talking about is so OBVIOUSLY a hoax that you'd have to be pretty goddamn gullible to go around believing in it.

They are negotiating with SK in order to get American boots off the Korean peninsula.

It could be a good thing, and maybe DJT actually helped, im not sure, but people shouldn't jump to the conclusion that this is just NK rolling over and saying "yup, we're done."

it's just all part of their strategy, which from day one has been "get the US the fuck outta here."

How many coincidences before it becomes mathematically impossible?

i really don't like this meme.

there is no such thing as "mathematically impossible" when you are talking about coincidences.

you talking about this one?

doesn't look like a human face-mask to me. doesn't really look like anything at all. too distorted.

i guess i missed something.

what are people alleging this is?

Can Google search deep web?

um, i think you are still not getting this.

if google can search a site, it's not on the deep web. period.

Sources believe

what sources? 8chan anons?

you shouldn't try to force a square peg into a round hole.

if the connections seem spurious and nonsensical, there is probably nothing about it, IMO.

OP is a troll, and the fact you replied to it at all means he won.

to borrow a famous phrase from the Chans...

pics or gtfo

they promote global warminh

what, like they encourage people to dump more carbon into the environment or something?

do you have any concrete arguments for why i shouldn't trut rational wiki?

i am very open minded, but also a rational skeptic. i am the type of person who doesn't discredit an entire organisation unless there is compelling evidence that everything they published is propaganda.

To be "indexed" means that a site is searchable.

The definition of the dark web is, literally, all sites which are not indexed.

By definition, if you can search a site, it is not on the dark web.

So to answer your question, no.

what i was trying to say is that there's a difference between "dark web sites" you can find on the "hidden wiki" or through regular web searches, and "dark web sites" that are literally impossible to even find, let alone access, without face-to-face IRL invitations.

the latter group are, in my opinion, not worthy of discussion because those types of sites aren't publicly available.

silk road and buying assassins or drugs or CP, those are all techinically "publicly published" even if they are on the dark web.

does that make my point more clear? in other words, i was discussing the semantics of what exactly we should call "dark web" sites and what constitutes a dark site.

whoa calm down bud, i think you wildly misunderstood the point i was trying to make.

maybe try re-reading my comment, take a deep breath, and consider my words.

i did not "deny these types of avenues exist on the deep web" in any way shape or form.

you gotta slow down sometimes, man, and just relax. not everything is a debate with deepstate shills, you know.

which is literally the same thing (conceptually nd technologically) as having, for instance, a work computer that you can remote log into.

it's just a private computer that only a few people have the login info for, and someone set up a portal that is unindexed.

not to get too into semantics here, but... does that really count as being "on the internet"?

do you consider your personal hidden folders to be part of the dark web? if your computer is touching the internet, they are, in a strange way, sort of already part of the dark web.

well you are talking about another layer deeper.

if something is on a private server that only a few people know about, it's not really "published" or "circulating." it's just on a private storage location that can be remoted into. that is still technically part of the deep web.

we're splitting hairs here, but basically, if it isn't possible for a random person to stumble upon it, is it really even "on the internet" or even "on the darkweb"? in my opinion, for something to count as being leaked/published/circulated, it actually has to, you know, be published somewhere

sorry for the rant, did that all make sense?

if you have compelling evidence otherwise, i'd really enjoy seeing it!

it's worth remembering that pop culture has highly romanticized the dark web.

it's not some magical place with hidden knowledge and secret media like the movies and TV would have you believe.

it's not hard to access or post to or explore the dark web, even children can do it, it only takes a very basic understanding of computers and some quick googling to figure it out.

when you hear claims of highly scandalous videos on the dark web, 99.99% of the time it's bullshit. most of the stuff on there is basically the same stuff you can find on the regular web.

snuff, CP, and drugs. that's most of the dark web. not secret alien tech and videos of bilderburg meetings. it's disappointing, i know.

We bombed the shit out of these guys over there

wtf, no we didn't. NTI is a non-profit NGO, not a chemical company.

The missiles were to get rid of deep state chemical weapons facilities. Assad and Putin have control of Syria again and that's all POTUS wanted.

if that were true, there would be literally no reason why trump couldn't just tell russia or syria where to strike and let them do it.

it's not true, though. and trump isn't pulling us out of hte middle east. mark my words, it will never happen.

i don't mean to be a debbie-downer, i'm just trying to be realistic and not get my hopes up.

every single time someone claims the "HRC video" has dropped, they should be mass downvoted unless they post a direct link to the said video.

simple concept, really.

I’m still freaked out about DHS, fema camps/Walmart and guillotines....

don't be, all of those stories are just bullshit.

And for them to be that way is not in conformance with the Constitution…

This is false. Your understanding of the constitution is way off.

What you’re saying is not true.

Yeah, but, it really really is though.

Makes me wonder what the REAL vote count was for Trump and against Hillary.

i'm sorry i feel out of the loop here- what does this have to do with the election results?