2 ms·
>And my point is that you can't take Snowden's assertions at face value. Good thing we aren't taking them at face value, seeing as the CIA spokesman lightly co
by intslack 13y ago
>And my point is that you can't take Snowden's assertions at face value.
Good thing we aren't taking them at face value, seeing as the CIA spokesman lightly corroborates his account rather than your assertion that he was fired for attempting to access and steal classified materials at the CIA.
And while we're on the subject of "moles," neither the internal NSA investigation nor the FBI investigation has found anything supporting your conspiracy theory to date.
- Nrsolis 13y agoWhat conspiracy theory? Do you really think that if there was real evidence that a foreign power was involved that the administration would be up-front with that information? What if the whole purpose of the action is to make them guess if the Russians and/or Chinese have copies of the documents? Not knowing for sure what the exposure is fuels the nightmares of the whole NSA. What if the Russians and Chinese know EVERYTHING?