Kut, you got those links I asked for?
The libs would like us to believe that Project Veritas makes a lot of stuff up, out of thin air. Acorn, Planned Parenthood, sure.
I'm thinking Trump should put Project Veritas on the gov't payroll looking into our own "intelligence" agencies?
https://www.google.com/amp/www.inqu...ng-to-pay-liberals-to-riot/amp/?client=safari
Would you call anything they put out reliable after this?
A lot? I'm not saying that, and your statement is very telling...."a lot?" Even if it's "a little," which seems to be what you are implying, then their future credibility in similar matters is suspect. I think most would understand this.
Oh. Okay. So are sting operations where cops offer people money to do illegal ****...so they can catch people doing illegal ****...are those cops reliable? C'mon Kut. You're better than that.
Basically it was sting/counter-sting. All Veritas got caught doing was trying to infiltrate a group to see if they could get them to admit they're willing to break the law. Hookers and druggies get busted the same way all the time. Now, in the Young Turks video, he said the "undercover" reporter was made because she'd already been identified as participating in one of the sting operations against Hillary's thugs. But in the article, she was "made" because she drove a white pickup truck...idunno, because blondes never drive white pickup trucks. So who knows?
So, are they reliable? The only rebuttal in this case is audio of this "undercover" reporter trying to get a liberal group to take the bait. Doesn't suggest anything more than that fact. If I'm biased to the left I might be inclined to believe the headlines more than just the knowable facts.
So, my opinion of reliable/unreliable is unchanged. I neither believe nor disbelieve. All parties have a reason to lie, and they all have more facts about the actual details than I do. Unless I can know those same facts, I tuck it away in the "plausible but unconfirmed" column. But I can have fun with it.
If you say so, but a "sting" typically involves exposing something that someone was already planning or inclined to do. Offering money to have someone commit a crime, is a crime in itself.
Nothing wrong. Just breaking out the hot and buttered.
If it's lightly buttered, mind sharing? Trying to watch my intake these days.
You know, I've never really liked a lot of salt on my popcorn. Just slather it in real butter and the butter has enough salt for me. Now that I've cut down on butter, it's still salty enough. But people do complain about blandness when I share.
Reading this and the project veritas video is seriously eye opening. The left has come completely unhinged and the man hasn't even taken office yet. This big difference is Obama, Holder and the DOJ let this crap go on and borderline encouraged it. Trump is extremely pro law enforcement and believes in the rule of law. Hopefully they crack down on this from day 1 and set an example that this crap will not be tolerated, otherwise its going to be a very interesting 4 years. Yes people are within their right to assemble and protest. But what they describe is domestic terrorism there is a big difference between an actual peaceful protest and doing things that will physically harm people and deny them freedom of movement and cause panics. This is absolutely nuts, speaking of nuts we will see who actually has them and will follow through in a couple days.
I got a chuckle out of that one.