He's right

He's right.

Other urls found in this thread:

twitter.com/skjultster/status/864484292898025472
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

>see Rick Wilson Twitter post
>He's Right

I didn't even read the tweet because I see Wilson I well enough in the thumbnail.

Twitterposts should be permaban

Saged.
twitter.com/skjultster/status/864484292898025472

Isn't that the dude that got pranked with the pisstapes?

Assange just admitted it. Later shills you'll be either dead or unemployed.

he didn't get pranked it's just a component of his forthcoming July surprise

How he finds time to post between raising those niglet babies ill never know.

Im basing my opinion on Podestas make an example email not some anonymous source.

Not even the same thing

reporters from WaPo and NYT are usually wrong,

but Sup Forums is always right.

people using words like Trumpeteers are never right

The morons here who buy every single RPG attempt by some user as proof are sad as fuck.

wapo has become a salt mine since last November, especially the comment sections of Trump/POTUS related articles
nyt is just shit, almost any article about politics reads like it was written by a 12 y/o with asperger

>Admitted.
He is joining the #sethrich hashtag spam and stasting that Wikileaks has and never will disclose a source and if any such disclosure happens it must be from another source. They haven't even confirmed Chelsea-Bardley Manning as source.

God you are jsut as fucking big of a nutcase as MSM saying "Trump definitely acted illegally in a meeting with Russian ministers" when McMaster came out and said "No, nothing happened".

He blocked me on Twitter because I posted a pic related

Kek

is it his contention that both of them are ridiculous because it doesn't make much sense to criticise an anonymous board and then put forward anonymous sources as believable.

>"Actual reporters are just as reliable as anons of Sup Forums"
Yes, he's right. You should trust MSM just as much as your trust your average greentext story on Sup Forums.

That should tell you how bad it has gotten, when people are more willing to believe anonymous posts from a Maylasian basket weaving forum than "news" from the MSM.

Wait until Kim Dotcom finishes rolling out of bed and getting dressed, then you're really fucked

you think liberals believe assange?

Their rationale is fucking ridiculous. If a source is anonymous then it's because "it needs protection as is resisting Trump". But if a source on the right says something, then they are only being political and pushing their own side.

They can't conceive that their "anonymous" sources are as biased as they consider named source on the right to be.