(February 2, 2018 at 6:18 pm)Khemikal Wrote: As usual, when someone finds out that they've been mislead, they try to settle for the person who pointed it out being coequally wrong.
Denied. A person previously under surveillance came under surveillance -again- for exactly the same shit as before, but this time..in a frighteningly increased capacity. So..there goes the whole "he was only under surveillance after he left the campaign". bit.
What were you reading....and why couldn't you find it online until I brought it up? I'm willing to bet it's a browser algorithm.......yet another example of the subtle power of electronic fuckery...which is, for the record..ongoing.
I haven't been mislead. I knew Page had been under scrutiny in the past and questioned your post regarding being 'under surveillance for years'. You produced your unsubstantiated source; reflecting only that you had not made it up, but in no way have you provided evidence that the 'under surveillance for years' is accurate.
Unsubstantiated sources alleged by cnn and parroted by washington examiner.
