Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 4 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
it's Friday at HM..
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles...focus.html

February 13, 2018
FBI-gate: The Outlines of the Story Are Coming into Focus
By Thomas Lifson
Thanks to the work of smart and hardworking (non-mainstream) journalists, we can peek just a bit over the horizon and see where the story of the weaponization of the FBI via a senior-level cabal is going from here.  I use the word "story" deliberately, because that is the way public opinion forms itself on major political affairs.  The progressives in the media and politics  have long understood this.  The cast of the story is now set, and some dramatic plot points have been identified.  The ending hasn't been written yet, of course, but the villains are identifying themselves or being exposed, and some of the heroes are emerging.  We are on the cusp of a drama much bigger than Watergate breaking open, and its story elements are compelling.
In the calm before the storm breaks, the mainstream media and the Democrat attack squad from the House Intel committee [/url] are in the midst of utterly discrediting themselves.  Once the story breaks into the open, indictments will be handed down, and the witnesses, hostile and cooperating, will be heard in hearings and in court.  They have worked together to cover up and distract from the story, but the truth will out, and now it is becoming clear how that will happen.

The fake controversy over the ten-page Schiff memo is keeping the morale of the #resistance crowd up, but Schiff himself will go down in history as the guy who kicked sand in the eyes of the investigators.  All that media effort in pushing the phony narrative of Russia collusion will make them into dupes and laughingstocks, once the solid evidence is brought to light that a conspiracy to push that phony narrative was run with key members of the Clinton machine working hand in glove with the cabal.
Sharyl Attkisson has done us a great favor in identifying the [i]dramatis personae who formed the FBI "secret society" that protected Hillary and spied on Trump.  She has organized a chart depicting the senior-level personnel changes at the Justice Department during the campaign, the Russia probe, and the Clinton email probe, highlighting in yellow the individuals James Comey appointed.
[Image: 204179_5_.png]
In the space of a year, as the presidential campaigns got rolling in the fall of 2015, James Comey moved his team into top positions in the intelligence and counterintelligence apparatus of the FBI.  That's where the surveillance capacity exists.  Thanks to the efforts of Chairman Devin Nunes of the House Intel Committee and Senators Grassley and Graham, we have the basic story already outlined and have received the first installment of the plot: the issuance of the FISA warrants on the basis of a fiction pushed by the Clinton campaign.
Disclosure of some of the lovebird texts of Peter Strzok and Lisa Page already has provided plenty of drama – romance, secrets, hatred, and a break-up text calling off the affair – and there are more texts to come.  Strzok's firing from the Mueller special counsel's team was the first manifestation of the cabal being busted, and last week's flurry of senior-level FBI officials departing is another sign that insiders know that the jig is up.  
Meanwhile, our own Clarice Feldman presents evidence that the guilty plea of General Michael Flynn, the pre-eminent scalp hanging from Special Counsel Robert Mueller's belt, may be thrown out of court when he appears for sentencing by Judge Emmet Sullivan, following the mysterious recusal of Judge Rudolph Contreras and the equally or even more mysterious request by Mueller to delay sentencing.  Something's up, and it is big.
The forthcoming Department of Justice inspector general's report, believed to be slated for next month, is a wild card.  With a staff of 250, I.G. Michael Horowitz should have uncovered much, and Horowitz has a sterling reputation.  But then again, so did James Comey at one point.  Lots of people putatively on our side have vouched for Horowitz, but we don't know the scope of the report, nor do we know what evidence of corruption will be presented.
However, a game-changer is about to drop.  Last Saturday, we got the first indirect, inferential evidence of a major revelation on its way: there is an informant from among the cast of characters Sharyl Attkisson highlighted in yellow, a canary singing to save himself.  
This mystery figure is the man who, a number of observers noticed, has never been mentioned as the information has dripped out of the FBI.  His name is Bill Priestap, and he was brought in by James Comey as assistant director of the FBI, Counterintelligence Division, in December 2015.
Preistap's identity as the DOJ's informant was inadvertently and indirectly confirmed Saturday night by Chris Stewart, a member of the Nunes committee, under informed and targeted questioning by Judge Jeanine Pirro, a former prosecutor and skilled courtroom interrogator.  
Watch below as she blindsides Stewart with Priestap's name, he deflects the question, and then she circles back in, softening him up by saying, "I don't like that I haven't heard of him."  Then she went in for the kill, laying out the way Comey "threw him under the bus" (more on that later from Sundance) and then says, "The fact that we haven't heard from Priestap tells me that he's cooperating with someone or...what?"
Poor Stewart, an honest man, then gives away the game by responding, "Well, look, I'm gonna be careful because I'm not sure what we can say on this, and believe me, I don't want to be the headline when Chris Stewart reveals a bunch of sensitive or classified information[.]"  Okay, he didn't say, Yes, Priestap's a cooperating witness, but it's clear to me that such an inference is justified.

Sundance of Conservative Treehouse has a brilliant analysis that should be read in its entirety laying out why Priestap is the songbird.
His analysis of the moment Comey "threw him under the bus" is persuasive:[/i]
Quote:On March 20th 2017 congressional testimony, James Comey was asked why the FBI Director did not inform congressional oversight about the counterintelligence operation that began in July 2016.
FBI Director Comey said he did not tell congressional oversight he was investigating presidential candidate Donald Trump because the Director of Counterintelligence suggested he not do so. *Very important detail.*
I cannot emphasize this enough. *VERY* important detail. Again, notice how Comey doesn't use Priestap's actual name, but refers to his position and title. Again, watch [Prompted]


Quote:... At that moment, that very specific moment during that March 20th hearing, anyone who watches these hearings closely could see FBI Director James Comey was attempting to create his own exit from being ensnared in the consequences from the wiretapping and surveillance operation of candidate Trump, President-elect Trump, and eventually President Donald Trump.
In essence, Bill Priestap was James Comey's fall guy.  We knew it at the time that Bill Priestap would likely see this the same way.  The guy would have too much to lose by allowing James Comey to set him up.
Immediately there was motive for Bill Priestap to flip and become the primary source to reveal the hidden machinations.  Why should he take the fall for the operation when there were multiple people around the upper-levels of leadership who carried out the operation[?]

Already, despite the mainstream media's best effort, half of the public now believes that senior law enforcement officials broke the law to hinder the Trump presidency, according to Rasmussen.  A grand narrative of breathtaking conspiracy and corruption awaits us as the biggest political scandal in American history unfolds.  The story now has a face and a narrator named Priestap, even though his information can't yet be revealed.  All in good tine, but preferably before November.



[i] Formally, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence or HPSCI.

Thanks to the work of smart and hardworking (non-mainstream) journalists, we can peek just a bit over the horizon and see where the story of the weaponization of the FBI via a senior-level cabal is going from here.  I use the word "story" deliberately, because that is the way public opinion forms itself on major political affairs.  The progressives in the media and politics  have long understood this.  The cast of the story is now set, and some dramatic plot points have been identified.  The ending hasn't been written yet, of course, but the villains are identifying themselves or being exposed, and some of the heroes are emerging.  We are on the cusp of a drama much bigger than Watergate breaking open, and its story elements are compelling.
In the calm before the storm breaks, the mainstream media and the Democrat attack squad from the House Intel committee [i] are in the midst of utterly discrediting themselves.  Once the story breaks into the open, indictments will be handed down, and the witnesses, hostile and cooperating, will be heard in hearings and in court.  They have worked together to cover up and distract from the story, but the truth will out, and now it is becoming clear how that will happen.

The fake controversy over the ten-page Schiff memo is keeping the morale of the #resistance crowd up, but Schiff himself will go down in history as the guy who kicked sand in the eyes of the investigators.  All that media effort in pushing the phony narrative of Russia collusion will make them into dupes and laughingstocks, once the solid evidence is brought to light that a conspiracy to push that phony narrative was run with key members of the Clinton machine working hand in glove with the cabal.
Sharyl Attkisson has done us a great favor in identifying the [i]dramatis personae who formed the FBI "secret society" that protected Hillary and spied on Trump.  She has organized a chart depicting the senior-level personnel changes at the Justice Department during the campaign, the Russia probe, and the Clinton email probe, highlighting in yellow the individuals James Comey appointed.

[Image: 204179_5_.png]

In the space of a year, as the presidential campaigns got rolling in the fall of 2015, James Comey moved his team into top positions in the intelligence and counterintelligence apparatus of the FBI.  That's where the surveillance capacity exists.  Thanks to the efforts of Chairman Devin Nunes of the House Intel Committee and Senators Grassley and Graham, we have the basic story already outlined and have received the first installment of the plot: the issuance of the FISA warrants on the basis of a fiction pushed by the Clinton campaign.
Disclosure of some of the lovebird texts of Peter Strzok and Lisa Page already has provided plenty of drama – romance, secrets, hatred, and a break-up text calling off the affair – and there are more texts to come.  Strzok's firing from the Mueller special counsel's team was the first manifestation of the cabal being busted, and last week's flurry of senior-level FBI officials departing is another sign that insiders know that the jig is up.  
Meanwhile, our own Clarice Feldman presents evidence that the guilty plea of General Michael Flynn, the pre-eminent scalp hanging from Special Counsel Robert Mueller's belt, may be thrown out of court when he appears for sentencing by Judge Emmet Sullivan, following the mysterious recusal of Judge Rudolph Contreras and the equally or even more mysterious request by Mueller to delay sentencing.  Something's up, and it is big.
The forthcoming Department of Justice inspector general's report, believed to be slated for next month, is a wild card.  With a staff of 250, I.G. Michael Horowitz should have uncovered much, and Horowitz has a sterling reputation.  But then again, so did James Comey at one point.  Lots of people putatively on our side have vouched for Horowitz, but we don't know the scope of the report, nor do we know what evidence of corruption will be presented.
However, a game-changer is about to drop.  Last Saturday, we got the first indirect, inferential evidence of a major revelation on its way: there is an informant from among the cast of characters Sharyl Attkisson highlighted in yellow, a canary singing to save himself.  
This mystery figure is the man who, a number of observers noticed, has never been mentioned as the information has dripped out of the FBI.  His name is Bill Priestap, and he was brought in by James Comey as assistant director of the FBI, Counterintelligence Division, in December 2015.
Preistap's identity as the DOJ's informant was inadvertently and indirectly confirmed Saturday night by Chris Stewart, a member of the Nunes committee, under informed and targeted questioning by Judge Jeanine Pirro, a former prosecutor and skilled courtroom interrogator.  
Watch below as she blindsides Stewart with Priestap's name, he deflects the question, and then she circles back in, softening him up by saying, "I don't like that I haven't heard of him."  Then she went in for the kill, laying out the way Comey "threw him under the bus" (more on that later from Sundance) and then says, "The fact that we haven't heard from Priestap tells me that he's cooperating with someone or...what?"
Poor Stewart, an honest man, then gives away the game by responding, "Well, look, I'm gonna be careful because I'm not sure what we can say on this, and believe me, I don't want to be the headline when Chris Stewart reveals a bunch of sensitive or classified information[.]"  Okay, he didn't say, Yes, Priestap's a cooperating witness, but it's clear to me that such an inference is justified.

Sundance of Conservative Treehouse has a brilliant analysis that should be read in its entirety laying out why Priestap is the songbird.
His analysis of the moment Comey "threw him under the bus" is persuasive:[/i][/i][/i]
Quote:On March 20th 2017 congressional testimony, James Comey was asked why the FBI Director did not inform congressional oversight about the counterintelligence operation that began in July 2016.
FBI Director Comey said he did not tell congressional oversight he was investigating presidential candidate Donald Trump because the Director of Counterintelligence suggested he not do so. *Very important detail.*
I cannot emphasize this enough. *VERY* important detail. Again, notice how Comey doesn't use Priestap's actual name, but refers to his position and title. Again, watch [Prompted]


Quote:... At that moment, that very specific moment during that March 20th hearing, anyone who watches these hearings closely could see FBI Director James Comey was attempting to create his own exit from being ensnared in the consequences from the wiretapping and surveillance operation of candidate Trump, President-elect Trump, and eventually President Donald Trump.
In essence, Bill Priestap was James Comey's fall guy.  We knew it at the time that Bill Priestap would likely see this the same way.  The guy would have too much to lose by allowing James Comey to set him up.
Immediately there was motive for Bill Priestap to flip and become the primary source to reveal the hidden machinations.  Why should he take the fall for the operation when there were multiple people around the upper-levels of leadership who carried out the operation[?]
[i][i]
Already, despite the mainstream media's best effort, half of the public now believes that senior law enforcement officials broke the law to hinder the Trump presidency, according to Rasmussen.  A grand narrative of breathtaking conspiracy and corruption awaits us as the biggest political scandal in American history unfolds.  The story now has a face and a narrator named Priestap, even though his information can't yet be revealed.  All in good tine, but preferably before November.
[/i][/i]

[i][i]
[url=https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/02/fbigate_the_outlines_of_the_story_are_coming_into_focus.html#_ednref1][i] Formally, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence or HPSCI.
[/i][/i][/i]
Never invite a Yoda to a frog leg dinner.
Go ahead invite Yoda to a Frog leg dinner
Reply
Quote:Already, despite the mainstream media's best effort, half of the public now believes that senior law enforcement officials broke the law to hinder the Trump presidency, according to Rasmussen.  A grand narrative of breathtaking conspiracy and corruption awaits us as the biggest political scandal in American history unfolds.  The story now has a face and a narrator named Priestap, even though his information can't yet be revealed.  All in good tine, but preferably before November

We should KNOW this from 911, Iraq, Kenyan Born Obama, Boston Bombing, Sandy Hook, Fast & Furious, and New Horizons passing Pluto bye-bye.

Fairy Balls Infecting Deep Organ Juices

Fracking Government Assholes

Bob... Ninja Assimilated
"The Light" - Jefferson Starship-Windows of Heaven Album
I'm an Earthling with a Martian Soul wanting to go Home.   
You have to turn your own lightbulb on. ©stevo25 & rhw007
Reply
by Ann Coulter
14 Feb 2018

Every place you look in Robert Mueller’s investigation, the same names keep popping up: FBI agent Peter Strzok and sleazy, foreign private eye — or “British intelligence agent” — Christopher Steele.

So it’s rather important that they both are Trump-hating fanatics, and one was being paid by Trump’s political opponent in a presidential campaign.

Steele is the author of the preposterous dossier that sparked the special counsel investigation, and Strzok is the FBI agent involved at every crucial turn of both the Trump and Hillary investigations.

As we found out from the House Intelligence memo, Steele told Department of Justice official Bruce Ohr that he “was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president.” (Ohr’s wife worked for Fusion GPS, and, like Steele, was being paid by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee.)

In the hands of Trump-obsessive Peter Strzok — he of the estrogen-dripping texts to his Trump-hating FBI lawyer mistress — the dossier was used to obtain a warrant under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act against Trump’s alleged “foreign policy adviser,” Carter Page.

The FISA warrant against Page constitutes the last crumbling piece of the “Russia collusion” story.


Strzok was the person who instigated the Russia investigation against Trump back in July 2016. He was the lead agent on the investigation into whether Hillary, as secretary of state, sent classified information on her private email account. (Conclusion:

She had — but it wasn’t any of the FBI’s business!) He volunteered for the Mueller investigation and remained there, right up until his Trump-hating texts were discovered by the inspector general of the FBI. (He was also, one surmises, the authority for many of the media’s lurid, anonymously-sourced claims about how the investigation was proceeding.)

Most strangely, Strzok was the FBI agent who asked Trump’s national security adviser, Michael Flynn, about his phone call with the Russian ambassador, Sergey Kislyak.

There was nothing wrong with Flynn’s conversation with Kislyak, but Flynn later pleaded guilty to lying to an FBI agent about it, based on a secretly recorded intercept of the phone call. The question remains: Why was any FBI agent even asking about a perfectly legitimate conversation? No one seems to know. But we do know the name of the FBI agent who asked: Peter Strzok.

Aside from Strzok’s girl-power text to his mistress upon Hillary becoming the first female presidential nominee — “About damn time!” — his most embarrassing message to her was about the Russia investigation:

“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office (FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe) — that there’s no way (Trump) gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40 …”

The media have tied themselves in knots trying to explain this text as meaning anything other than its obvious, natural meaning. To wit: “Although the worst is unlikely (Trump wins/you die before age 40), you still prepare by taking out ‘insurance’ (we take Trump down with the Russia investigation/your family gets a payout).”

I keep looking for a plausible alternative interpretation, but they’re all absurd; e.g., The Washington Post points out that even with an insurance policy, YOU STILL DIE! (Yes, and even with the Russian investigation, TRUMP IS STILL PRESIDENT.)
 
Everyone except American journalists understands that Strzok’s “insurance” was their plan to tie Trump up with an endless investigation.

Which, coincidentally, is exactly what they’ve done.

Contrary to every single person talking on MSNBC, the issue is not whether FBI agents are allowed to have political opinions. In a probe of the president, FBI agents shouldn’t be dying to take him down for political reasons.

You want drug enforcement agents to be hungry to shut down drug cartels. You want organized crime prosecutors to be hungry to dismantle the mob. You want your maid to be hungry to clean your house. But the staff on a special counsel’s open-ended investigation of the president aren’t supposed to be hungry. They’re supposed to be fair.

This is an investigation with no evidence of a crime, apart from politically motivated, anti-Trump investigators relying on a Hillary-funded dossier.

Also contrary to every single person talking on MSNBC, Steele’s dossier is not like a neighbor who hates you telling the police you’re cooking meth in your basement. The police still have to investigate, don’t they?

First of all, if after 18 months of police work, the only evidence that you’re cooking meth in your basement is STILL your neighbor’s bald accusation, reasonable people will conclude that your neighbor is a liar. That’s what the Steele dossier is. It was the only evidence of Trump’s collusion with Russia 18 months ago, and it’s the only evidence of Trump’s collusion with Russia today.

Moreover, it’s not just the informant who hates the target. The investigators do, too. This is more like a police officer calling the police on his wife, sending himself on the call, shooting her, then writing up the police report concluding it was a justified shooting.

When your entire investigation turns on a handful of people with corrupt motives, maybe it’s time to call off the investigation.

COPYRIGHT 2018 ANN COULTER
Never invite a Yoda to a frog leg dinner.
Go ahead invite Yoda to a Frog leg dinner
Reply
Published on Feb 14, 2018
- Trade Genius Academy: Learn the safe, sure way to trade.
https://www.TradeGeniusAcademy.com

Good evening, I’m still reporting on: Obama & Rice Asked Brits to Spy on Trump, 2055

Synopsis: This is certainly one of THE most important stories I've ever done.
Within the last hour we received what appears to be an official British TOP SECRET signals intelligence document dated Nov. 17, 2016, showing that President Obama and his National Security Advisor, Susan Rice were the ones who first requested electronic spying on the candidate Donald Trump, just 7 days after Trump won the Republican nomination in late August, 2016.
The secret document, which has no redactions, was sent by Robert Hannigan, the Director of GCHQ, to Boris Johnson, the British Secretary of State for Foreign & Commonwealth Affairs. It is a request for a 90-day renewal of an electronic spying program which had been running since Sept. 15, 2016.
Even the exact location of the Trump Transition team was spelled out - Trump Tower, 725 5th Ave., New York, NY, the 5th and the 26th floors.
The spying project was called FULSOME. It was originally requested by Obama and Rice on Aug. 28, 2016:
"On 28 August 2016, GCHQ/CSO filed for permission to execute Project FULSOME at the request of the US President, seeking intelligence gathering into the Trump Organization and Donald J. Trump for President, Inc."
It was designed to run for 90 days, however surprise - despite bugging two floors of Trump Tower for the last 55 days of the Presidential campaign, and delivering all that intelligence up to Obama and Rice - and you can bet it went straight to the Clinton campaign as well, Trump won by a direct miracle of God.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgHjSmEq2Lk
Never invite a Yoda to a frog leg dinner.
Go ahead invite Yoda to a Frog leg dinner
Reply
[Image: 28277146_331162010736535_465887207100640...e=5B07B644]

by Aaron Klein
16 Feb 2018

The FBI has dedicated an untold number of resources into launching an investigation based on the infamous, 35-page largely discredited anti-Trump dossier alleging unsubstantiated collusion with Russia and claiming without any evidence that Donald Trump engaged in sordid sexual acts caught on video.

Yet that same dossier-obsessed FBI is now facing scrutiny for allegedly taking few actions after the agency was alerted to a YouTube comment last fall bearing the name of the future Florida school mass shooter and declaring, “Im going to be a professional school shooter.”

The FBI’s probe of Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign reportedly centered on the dossier despite the bureau being fully aware that the questionable document was produced by the controversial Fusion GPS opposition political research outfit and was paid for by Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee.

The Guardian recently reported that the FBI has been utilizing a second dossier in its investigation of unsubstantiated claims of collusion between Russia and Trump’s presidential campaign, this one authored by Cody Shearer, a shadowy former tabloid journalist who has long been closely associated with various Clinton scandals. National Review previously dubbed Shearer a “Creepy Clinton Confidante” and “the Strangest Character in Hillary’s Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy.”

A four-page House Intelligence Committee memo alleging abuse of surveillance authority detailed the centrality of the dossier in the FBI’s probe, which has not produced any evidence of collusion between Trump’s campaign and Russia.

In addition to wild accusations about meetings with Russians, Steele’s dossier infamously claimed that while Trump was staying in the presidential suite at the Ritz Carlton Hotel in Moscow in 2013, the real estate mogul hired “a number of prostitutes to perform a ‘golden showers’ (urination) show in front of him.” The dossier claims that Trump wanted to “defile” the bed because he learned that President Obama had used the same suite during a trip to Russia. Those dossier claims have never been verified.

Washington Post report last year provided a window into some of the FBI’s resources in probing alleged Russian attempts to interfere in the election. According to the newspaper, in the summer of 2016, then-CIA Director John Brennan convened a “secret task force at CIA headquarters composed of several dozen analysts and officers from the CIA, the NSA and the FBI.”
The Post reported the task force included “a team of operations specialists at the CIA, NSA and FBI who took direction from the task force on where to aim their subsequent efforts to collect more intelligence on Russia.”

It would later be revealed that Comey’s FBI utilized the dossier in three FISA court applications to conduct surveillance on Carter Page, who briefly served as a volunteer foreign policy adviser to Trump’s 2016 campaign.   The surveillance operation undoubtedly drained still more FBI resources.

While the FBI was ensconced in its dossier investigation it received another tip bearing the name of the Florida school mass shooter.

Ben Bennight, a bail bondsman in Mississippi, told reporters he took a screenshot of the “Im going to be a professional school shooter” comment last fall and flagged it to Youtube, which in turn removed the offending remark. Bennight said he alerted his local FBI field office in a voice mail and was interviewed the next day by field agents.

The YouTube user name for the individual who left the eerie comment was “nikolas cruz.”  Bennight said he did not hear anything further on the matter until an individual bearing the same name carried out the Parkland, Fla. school shooting, murdering 17 people in cold blood.

Rob Lasky, the FBI special agent in charge in Miami, told the New York Times the bureau was reviewing what steps were taken after the FBI received Bennight’s tip.

“There was no particular information about the particular time, location or further identifiers about the person who posted the comment,” Lasky said. “No additional information was found to positively identify the person who posted this comment. There was no connection found to South Florida.”

It was unclear which “further identifiers” would be required given that the YouTube user’s name might actually be the real name of the Florida school shooter.

Running Cruz’s name through law enforcement databases might have turned up a positive ID.  According to reports, Broward County police were called to the killer’s home at least 39 times over a seven-year period.

Cross-referencing the YouTube user’s name on other social media accounts would have found similarly disturbing patterns.
Local KTLA reported:
Quote:Posts under videos on YouTube and other sites by someone using the name Nikolas Cruz include threatening comments, such as:
“I whana shoot people with my AR-15.”
“I wanna die Fighting killing s**t ton of people.”
“I am going to kill law enforcement one day they go after the good people.”
Also an Instagram account using the name @Nikolascruzmakarov contained a profile picture of a masked individual and included posts of a collection of firearms on a bed, and a picture from the perspective of a scope looking out a window seemingly channeling a sniper.

The Times, however, reported that the FBI would have had few options even if they followed through with the tip:

Agents are still trying to sort out what happened, but without more information and limited ability under the circumstances to obtain a subpoena, their options were few.

Had agents sought a grand jury subpoena to obtain data from YouTube to identify the person behind the posting, it is not certain that prosecutors would have agreed to seek one based on the scant information available. Agents might have a hard time convincing prosecutors of an imminent threat because the post mentioned no time or location of a possible shooting.

Even if agents had tied Mr. Cruz to the YouTube post, the authorities probably would have questioned him or his family and friends but would have been unable seize his gun without a court order.
Aaron Klein is Breitbart’s Jerusalem bureau chief and senior i
nvestigative reporter. He is a New York Times bestselling author and hosts the popular weekend talk radio program, “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio.” Follow him on Twitter @AaronKleinShow. Follow him on Facebook.
Never invite a Yoda to a frog leg dinner.
Go ahead invite Yoda to a Frog leg dinner
Reply
Steve Hughes - The Liberal Mentality - ABSOLUTELY BRILLIANT!!!  
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8OP8Rzi...e=youtu.be
Never invite a Yoda to a frog leg dinner.
Go ahead invite Yoda to a Frog leg dinner
Reply
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/02/...-election/
John Kerry Approved Visas for Russian Operatives to Enter US in 2014 and ‘Interfere’ with Election

Doh
Never invite a Yoda to a frog leg dinner.
Go ahead invite Yoda to a Frog leg dinner
Reply
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/02/mue...cheme.html

Mueller Indictment - The "Russian Influence" Is A Commercial Marketing Scheme
Yesterday the U.S. Justice Department indicted the Russian Internet Research Agency on some dubious legal grounds. It covers thirteen Russian people and three Russian legal entities. The main count of the indictment is an alleged "Conspiracy to Defraud the United States".
The published indictment gives support to our long held believe that there was no "Russian influence" campaign during the U.S. election. What is described and denounced as such was instead a commercial marketing scheme which ran click-bait websites to generate advertisement revenue and created online crowds around virtual persona to promote whatever its commercial customers wanted to promote. The size of the operation was tiny when compared to the hundreds of millions in campaign expenditures. It had no influence on the election outcome.
The indictment is fodder for the public to prove that the Mueller investigation is "doing something". It distracts from further questioning  the origin of the Steele dossier. It is full of unproven assertions and assumptions. It is a sham in that none of the Russian persons or companies indicted will ever come in front of a U.S. court. That is bad because the indictment is build on the theory of a new crime which, unless a court throws it out, can be used to incriminate other people in other cases and might even apply to this blog. The later part of this post will refer to that.
In the early 1990s some dude in St.Petersburg made a good business selling hot dogs. He opened a colorful restaurant. Local celebrities and politicians were invited to gain notoriety while the restaurant served cheap food for too high prices. It was a good business. A few years later he moved to Moscow and gained contracts to cater to schools and to the military. The food he served was still substandard.
But catering bad food as school lunches gave him, by chance, the idea for a new business:
Quote:Parents were soon up in arms. Their children wouldn’t eat the food, saying it smelled rotten.
As the bad publicity mounted, Mr. Prigozhin’s company, Concord Catering, launched a counterattack, a former colleague said. He hired young men and women to overwhelm the internet with comments and blog posts praising the food and dismissing the parents’ protests.
“In five minutes, pages were drowning in comments,” said Andrei Ilin, whose website serves as a discussion board about public schools. “And all the trolls were supporting Concord.”
The trick worked beyond expectations. Prigozhin had found a new business. He hired some IT staff and low paid temps to populate various message boards, social networks and the general internet with whatever his customers asked him for.
You have a bad online reputation? Prigozhin can help. His internet company will fill the net with positive stories and remarks about you. Your old and bad reputation will be drowned by the new and good one. Want to promote a product or service? Prigozhin's online marketeers can address the right crowds.
[Image: sockpuppet-s.jpg]
Pic: A Russian influencer
To achieve those results the few temps who worked on such projects needed to multiply their online personalities. It is better to have fifty people vouch for you online than just five. No one cares if these are real people or just virtual ones. The internet makes it easy to create such sock-puppets. The virtual crowd can then be used to push personalities, products or political opinions. Such schemes are nothing new or special. Every decent "western" public relations and marketing company will offer a similar service and has done so for years.
While it is relatively easy to have sock-puppets swamp the comment threads of such sites as this blog, it is more difficult to have a real effect on social networks. These depend on multiplier effects. To gain many real "likes", "re-tweets" or "followers" an online persona needs a certain history and reputation. Real people need to feel attached to it. It takes some time and effort to build such a multiplier personality, be it real or virtual.
At some point Prigozhin, or whoever by then owned the internet marketing company, decided to expand into the lucrative English speaking market. This would require to build many English language online persona and to give those some history and time to gain crowds of followers and a credible reputation. The company sent a few of its staff to the U.S. to gain some impressions, pictures and experience of the surroundings. They would later use these to impersonate as U.S. locals. It was a medium size, long-term investment of maybe a hundred-thousand bucks over two or three years.
The U.S. election provided an excellent environment to build reputable online persona with large followings of people with discriminable mindsets. The political affinity was not important. The personalities only had to be very engaged and stick to their issue - be it left or right or whatever. The sole point was to gain as many followers as possible who could be segmented along social-political lines and marketed to the companies customers.
Again - there is nothing new to this. It is something hundreds, if not thousands of companies are doing as their daily business. The Russian company hoped to enter the business with a cost advantage. Even its mid-ranking managers were paid as little as $1,200 per month. The students and other temporary workers who would 'work' the virtual personas as puppeteers would earn even less. Any U.S. company in a similar business would have higher costs.
In parallel to building virtual online persona the company also built some click-bait websites and groups and promoted these through mini Facebook advertisements. These were the "Russian influence ads" on Facebook the U.S. media were so enraged about. They included the promotion of a Facebook page about cute puppies. Back in October we described how those "Russian influence" ads (most of which were shown after the election or were not seen at all) were simply part of a commercial scheme:
Quote:The pages described and the ads leading to them are typical click-bait, not part of a political influence op.
...
One builds pages with "hot" stuff that hopefully attracts lots of viewers. One creates ad-space on these pages and fills it with Google ads. One attracts viewers and promotes the spiked pages by buying $3 Facebook mini-ads for them. The mini-ads are targeted at the most susceptible groups.
A few thousand users will come and look at such pages. Some will 'like' the puppy pictures or the rant for or against LGBT and further spread them. Some will click the Google ads. Money then flows into the pockets of the page creator. One can rinse and repeat this scheme forever. Each such page is a small effort for a small revenue. But the scheme is highly scaleable and parts of it can be automatized.
Because of the myriad of U.S. sanctions against Russia the monetization of these business schemes required some creativity. One can easily find the name of a real U.S. person together with the assigned social security number and its date of birth. Those data are enough to open, for example, a Paypal account under a U.S. name. A U.S. customer of the cloaked Russian Internet company could then pay to the Paypal account and the money could be transferred from there to Moscow. These accounts could also be used to buy advertisement on Facebook. The person who's data was used to create the account would never learn of it and would have no loss or other damage. Another scheme is to simply pay some U.S. person to open a U.S. bank account and to then hand over the 'keys' to that account.
The Justice Department indictment is quite long and detailed. It must have been expensive. If you read it do so with the above in mind. Skip over the assumptions and claims of political interference and digest only the facts. All that is left is, as explained, a commercial marketing scheme.
I will not go into all its detail of the indictment but here are some points that support the above description.
Point 4:
Quote:Defendants, posing as US. persons and creating false U.S. personas, operated social media pages and groups designed to attract U.S. audiences. These groups and pages, which addressed divisive US. political and social issues, falsely claimed to be controlled by US. activists when, in fact, they were controlled by Defendants. Defendants also used the stolen identities of real U.S. persons to post on social media accounts. Over time, these social media accounts became Defendants' means to reach significant numbers of Americans ...
Point 10d:
Quote:By in or around April 2014, the ORGANIZATION formed a department that went by various names but was at times referred to as the "translator project." This project focused on the US. population and conducted operations on social media platforms such as YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter. By approximately July 2016, more than eighty ORGANIZATION employees were assigned to the translator project.
(Some U.S. media today made the false claim that $1.25 million per month were spend by the company for its U.S. campaign. But Point 11 of the indictment says that the company ran a number of such projects directed at a Russian audience while only the one described in 10d above is aimed at an U.S. audience. All these projects together had a monthly budget of $1.25 million.)
(Point 17, 18 and 19 indict individual persons who have worked for the "translator" project" "to at least in and around [some month] 2014". It is completely unclear how these persons, who seem to have left the company two years before the U.S. election, are supposed to have anything to do with the claimed "Russian influence" on the U.S. election and the indictment.)
Point 32:
Quote:Defendants and their co-conspirators, through fraud and deceit, created hundreds of social media accounts and used them to develop certain fictitious U.S. personas into "leader[s] of public opinion" in the United States.
The indictment then goes on and on describing the "political activities" of the sock-puppet personas. Some posted pro-Hillary slogans, some anti-Hillary stuff, some were pro-Trump, some anti-everyone, some urged not to vote, others to vote for third party candidates. The sock-puppets did not create or post fake news. They posted mainstream media stories.
Some of the persona called for going to anti-Islam rallies while others promoted pro-Islam rallies. The Mueller indictment lists a total of eight rallies. Most of these did not take place at all. No one joined the "Miners For Trump" rallies in Philly and Pittsburgh. A "Charlotte against Trump" march on November 19 - after the election - was attended by one hundred people. Eight people came for a pro-Trump rally in Fort Myers. 
The sock-puppets called for rallies to establish themselves as  'activist' and 'leadership' persona, to generated more online traffic and additional followers. There was in fact no overall political trend in what the sock-puppets did. The sole point of all such activities was to create a large total following by having multiple personas which together covered all potential social-political strata.
At Point 86 the indictment turns to Count Two - "Conspiracy to Commit Wire Fraud and Bank Fraud". The puppeteers opened, as explained above, various Paypal accounts using 'borrowed' data.
Then comes the point which confirms the commercial marketing story as laid out above:
Point 95:
Quote:Defendants and their co-conspirators also used the accounts to receive money from real U.S. persons in exchange for posting promotions and advertisements on the ORGANIZATION-controlled social media pages. Defendants and their co-conspirators typically charged certain U.S. merchants and U.S. social media sites between 25 and 50 U.S. dollars per post for promotional content on their popular false U.S. persona accounts, including Being Patriotic, Defend the 2nd, and Blacktivist.
There you have it. There was no political point to what the Russian company did. Whatever political slogans one of the company's sock-puppets posted had only one aim: to increase the number of followers for that sock-puppet. The sole point of creating a diverse army of sock-puppets with large following crowds was to sell the 'eyeballs' of the followers to the paying customers of the marketing company.
There were, according to the indictment, eighty people working on the "translator project". These controlled "hundreds" of sock-puppets online accounts each with a distinct "political" personality. Each of these sock-puppets had a large number of followers - in total several hundred-thousands. Now let's assume that one to five promotional posts can be sold per day on each of the sock-puppets content stream. The scheme generates several thousand dollars per day ($25 per promo, hundreds of sock-puppets, 1-5 promos per day per sock-puppet). The costs for this were limited to the wages of up to eighty persons in Moscow, many of them temps, of which the highest paid received some $1,000 per month. While the upfront multiyear investment to create and establish the virtual personas was probably significant, this likely was, over all, a profitable business.
Again - this had nothing to do with political influence on the election. The sole point of political posts was to create 'engagement' and a larger number of followers in each potential social-political segment. People who buy promotional posts want these to be targeted at a specific audience. The Russian company could offer whatever audience was needed. It had sock-puppets with pro-LGBT view and a large following and sock-puppets with anti-LGBT views and a large following. It could provide pro-2nd amendment crowds as well as Jill Stein followers. Each of the sock-puppets had over time generated a group of followers that were like minded. The entity buying the promotion simply had to choose which group it preferred to address.
The panic of the U.S. establishment over the loss of their preferred candidate created an artificial storm over "Russian influence" and assumed "collusion" with the Trump campaign. (Certain Democrats though, like Adam Schiff, profit from creating a new Cold War through their sponsoring armament companies.)
The Mueller investigation found no "collusion" between anything Russia and the Trump campaign. The indictment does not mentions any. The whole "Russian influence" storm is based on a misunderstanding of commercial activities of a Russian marketing company in U.S. social networks.
There is a danger in this. The indictment sets up a new theory of nefarious foreign influence that could be applied to even this blog. As U.S. lawyer Robert Barns explains:
Quote:The only thing frightening about this indictment is the dangerous and dumb precedent it could set: foreign nationals criminally prohibited from public expression in the US during elections unless registered as foreign agents and reporting their expenditures to the FEC.
...
Mueller's new crime only requires 3 elements: 1) a foreign national; 2) outspoken on US social media during US election; and 3) failed to register as a foreign agent or failed to report receipts/expenditures of speech activity. Could indict millions under that theory.
...
The legal theory of the indictment for most of the defendants and most of the charges alleges that the "fraud" was simply not registering as a foreign agent or not reporting expenses to the FEC because they were a foreign national expressing views in a US election.
Author Leonid Bershidsky, who prominently writes for Bloomberg, remarks:
Quote:I'm actually surprised I haven't been indicted. I'm Russian, I was in the U.S. in 2016 and I published columns critical of both Clinton and Trump w/o registering as a foreign agent.
As most of you will know your author writing this is German. I write pseudo-anonymously for a mostly U.S. audience. My postings are political and during the U.S. election campaign expressed an anti-Hillary view. The blog is hosted on U.S, infrastructure paid for by me. I am not registered as Foreign Agent or with the Federal Election Commission.
Under the theory on which the indictment is based I could also be indicted for a similar "Conspiracy to Defraud the United States".
(Are those of you who kindly donate for this blog co-conspiractors?)
When Yevgeni Prigozhin, the hot dog caterer who allegedly owns the internet promotion business, was asked about the indictment he responded:
Quote:"The Americans are really impressionable people, they see what they want to see. [...] If they want to see the devil, let them see him."
Posted by b on February 17, 2018 at 03:09 PM | Permalink
Never invite a Yoda to a frog leg dinner.
Go ahead invite Yoda to a Frog leg dinner
Reply
[Image: 27971800_2080400642197716_65550984894413...e=5B0846E7]

[/url][Image: 10592952_781450158585776_683550200887664...e=5B1F5820]


Ana Smith
[url=https://www.facebook.com/#] 
Passengers Killed on Crashed Russian Plane Allegedly Include Rosatom/UraniumOne Executive and Russian Source for Christopher Steele's "Dossier" against Trump
Never invite a Yoda to a frog leg dinner.
Go ahead invite Yoda to a Frog leg dinner
Reply
[Image: Obama-Portriat-600-LI.jpg]

Fox News: Murdered DNC Staffer Sent 44,053 Internal Emails to WikiLeaks
https://pjmedia.com/trending/2017/05/16/...wikileaks/

Via Fox News:

A federal investigator who reviewed an FBI forensic report -- generated within 96 hours after DNC staffer Seth Rich's murder -- detailing the contents Rich’s computer said he made contact with WikiLeaks through Gavin MacFadyen, a now-deceased American investigative reporter, documentary filmmaker, and director of WikiLeaks who was living in London at the time.

“I have seen and read the emails between Seth Rich and WikiLeaks,” the federal investigator told Fox News, confirming the MacFadyen connection. He said the emails are in possession of the FBI, while the stalled case is in the hands of the Washington Police Department.

The revelation is consistent with the findings of Rod Wheeler, a former DC homicide detective and Fox News contributor and whose private investigation firm was hired by a third party on behalf of Rich’s family to probe the case. Rich was shot from behind in the wee hours, but was not robbed.

“My investigation up to this point shows there was some degree of email exchange between Seth Rich and WikiLeaks,” Wheeler said. “I do believe that the answers to who murdered Seth Rich sits on his computer on a shelf at the DC police or FBI headquarters.”

The federal investigator, who requested anonymity, said 44,053 emails and 17,761 attachments between Democratic National Committee leaders, spanning from January 2015 through late May 2016, were transferred from Rich to MacFadyen before May 21.

Investigator: Murdered DNC Staffer Was Communicating with WikiLeaks Prior to Death

Rich left Lou’s City Bar, a couple miles from his home, at about 1:15 a.m. on July 10. His immediate activities after leaving the bar remain a mystery:
Never invite a Yoda to a frog leg dinner.
Go ahead invite Yoda to a Frog leg dinner
Reply
[Image: 28168537_1630796633668199_48308615891364...e=5B4B05D8]
Never invite a Yoda to a frog leg dinner.
Go ahead invite Yoda to a Frog leg dinner
Reply
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/...ium=social

CNN, Jake Tapper Face Growing Criticism Over ‘Abusive’ Anti-Gun ‘Show Trial’

by John Nolte
22 Feb, 2018

CNN’s anti-gun town hall event and its left-wing moderator, Jake Tapper, are facing widespread criticism over what many saw as a bullying “show trial.”

Tapper is being singled out for much of the criticism from those who say he remained silent as abusive personal attacks were hurled at Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) and NRA spokesperson Dana Loesch. Incredibly, Tapper also remained silent as his audience booed a rape victim.

At the Wednesday night spectacle, those in favor of protecting our Second Amendment civil rights were vastly outnumbered by an audience packed with hostile gun-haters and emotional questioners, including children.

According to various reports, the anti-gun participants were given scripted questions crafted by CNN. The last-place network has denied this by attacking a school shooting victim as a liar. His accusation, however, is credible given CNN’s long and disturbing history of using plants.

Throughout the hour, the audience heckled, howled, and poured derision on Loesch and Rubio. Other than admonishing his audience for calling Loesch a “murderer,” Tapper stood by in silent approval as abuse and personal attacks rained down on his outnumbered guests.

The Media Research Center writes, “Jake Tapper sat back as the wild crowd targeted … Rubio with boos and jeers… The wildest moment allowed by Tapper was when Parkland, Florida student Cameron Kasky smeared the Senator by equating him to the shooter that killed 17 of his classmates. And Tapper thanked him for all of it.”

Specifically, this is what Kasky snarled at Rubio, “Senator Rubio, it’s hard to look at you and not look down the barrel on an AR-15 and not look at Nikolas Cruz[.]”

Tapper then thanked Kasky.

Actor Adam Baldwin was one of many who compared the event to a “show trial.”

[Image: 28168693_1599057193526779_22593479735055...e=5B1FE98A]
Never invite a Yoda to a frog leg dinner.
Go ahead invite Yoda to a Frog leg dinner
Reply
[Image: 28166849_2341415552550496_89314768401687...e=5B47BDA5]
Never invite a Yoda to a frog leg dinner.
Go ahead invite Yoda to a Frog leg dinner
Reply
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/02/...tions.html
McCain associate takes Fifth on Trump dossier questions

A former State Department official and associate of Sen. John McCain has invoked his Fifth Amendment right not to testify in connection with questions from the House Intelligence Committee about the anti-Trump dossier’s Russian sources, according to a law enforcement source.

David J. Kramer, who is a central player in how the unverified Trump dossier made its way to the FBI in late 2016, testified before the committee in December in a closed-door session, indicating he had information about the dossier's sources. A subpoena was issued for mid-January, as first reported by The Washington Examiner

The law enforcement source confirmed, however, that Kramer did not appear and has exercised his Fifth Amendment rights. 

Yet Kramer gave a videotaped deposition last December in separate civil litigation against BuzzFeed about the dossier and his contact with the former British spy who compiled it, Christopher Steele. Steele was hired by opposition research firm Fusion GPS to write and research the dossier, with funding from the Democratic National Committee and Clinton campaign. 

According to British court records obtained by Fox News as part of its ongoing investigation of the Trump dossier, Kramer was personally briefed in late November 2016 by Steele in Surrey, England. After that briefing, Steele told the British court that an arrangement was made so that Fusion GPS -- co-founded by Glenn Simpson – would provide hard copies of the dossier to McCain via Kramer. Shortly afterward, the dossier was given to the FBI, which already had its own copy from Steele.
Never invite a Yoda to a frog leg dinner.
Go ahead invite Yoda to a Frog leg dinner
Reply
by Pam Key
23 Feb 2018

Friday on his nationally syndicated radio show, conservative talker Rush Limbaugh described CNN as having a ”literal, trashy, garbage existence,” and said it was ”descending into its own mental illness.”
Partial transcript as follows:

CNN tweeted last night, “President Donald Trump described someone who would shoot up a school as a ‘savage sicko.’ … NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch described the gunman as ‘an insane monster’ who is ‘nuts’ and ‘crazy.’” This kind of “language about mental health could be harmful, experts say.” Are you kidding me? So CNN — in its literal trashy, garbage existence — has to tweet out last night… They are so poisoned and obsessed with hatred for Trump that they’re now coming to the defense of the shooter!

Because for Trump to refer to the shooter as a “savage sicko,” or for the NRA spokeswoman to refer to him as an “insane monster,” this kind of language is unhelpful, “experts say.” This kind of language could be harmful, “experts say.” So I figured if there is a tweet, then CNN’s actually promoting a story. And, lo and behold, I next found the story. “Trump’s Language on School Shooter’s Mental Health Could Be Harmful, Experts Say,” and after repeating what I just said as the opening paragraph, it says:

“And at a White House briefing Thursday, the president again used the term ‘sicko.’ The shooter, Nikolas Cruz, struggled with depression, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and autism, according to a 2016 Florida Department of Children and Families report. But having a mental health diagnosis does not mean he would become violent, many experts say. And although Trump has said he wants to focus on mental health to stop school shootings, calling Cruz a ‘sicko’ doesn’t help, those experts claim.

“‘When it comes to mental health, language really matters. This is not about being politically…’ said [a] senior policy adviser with the National Alliance on Mental Illness.” What is the guy gonna do in jail? Go grab a gun and start shooting people again? Do you understand this? This has become… If anybody’s mentally ill, it is the combined employment at CNN.

If anybody has lost their grip, if anybody has become so obsessed with one human being that they will not stop until they have wreaked every bit of damage they can, it is CNN. I’ve never seen anything like this, and I have seen a lot in my 30 years.

I have never seen from that rally that was not a rally that was a setup from the get-go, that had an avowed political purpose that was opposite what it was said to be in the way it was promoted, to now deciding Trump could be to blame here for inciting future shooters because he’s insulting the mentally ill. It’s not helpful, and it could be harmful, “experts say.” This is mentally ill. We have a major news network which is on the verge of descending into its own mental illness.

And it’s everybody that works there! It is the most uncanny thing. It’s everybody that works there. There isn’t a single exception. I don’t care what time of day or night you watch CNN, you are being treated to entire, full-fledged, undiluted, raw delusionment — unhinged mental illness. It’s the only way to describe this. No matter what happens, and no matter what is said — no matter who says it or how it’s said — somehow it’s either Donald Trump’s fault or the next event will be Donald Trump’s fault.

Well, everything is Donald Trump’s fault — everything — ad they’re probably gonna be even contemporaries today. I watch CNN now for the entertainment value just to see how they are going to turn whatever latest news, breaking story there is into the way they treat it. I swear, I sit here and I watch the way these people react and characterize things, and in no way could a rational mind come up with what they come up with every hour of day. There is no letup in it.

I find myself asking: Are there meetings every day with the staff at CNN for guidance and instruction, or are they individually capable — as human beings — of acting this totally in a deranged way in unison individually? “Trump’s Language on School Shooter’s Mental Health Could Be Harmful…” CNN has yet to express anger at the shooter. CNN has yet to express any anger, and CNN hasn’t really made a big deal out of the deputy who was on site and didn’t pull the trigger, didn’t go into the school, didn’t try to help out. Oh, I’m sorry. They have! They… Forgive me, folks.

They are now using this as an example of how Trump’s concealed-carry solution to violence in the schools won’t work, that it’s a silly and stupid idea. Which enables the media to keep the focus on the NRA and Republicans and Trump when they had nothing to do with it — literally nothing to do with it — and the people who did have every in the world to do with knowing who the guy was, ample opportunity to stop him. They didn’t do a thing, and there’s no anger at them. It’s the most amazing thing

Follow Pam Key on Twitter @pamkeyNEN
Never invite a Yoda to a frog leg dinner.
Go ahead invite Yoda to a Frog leg dinner
Reply
[Image: 27858887_1040258159470623_58270658274860...e=5B13088F]

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article42388.html
Quote:Obama - CIA Manchurian Candidate Groomed by Communists to Destroy AmericaPolitics / Conspiracy Theory Sep 23, 2013 - 07:01 AM GMT
By: Submissions

John Rolls Submits: Dave Hodges writes: Former FBI Weatherman Task Force supervisor, Max Noel, noted that the FBI utilized a CARL test when it conducted background checks on various suspects. The acronym CARL stands for Character, Associates, Reputation, and Loyalty is used to assess candidates fitness to hold the highest office in the country. On each of these four points of power, Obama fails and fails miserably. Like many FBI law enforcement agents and officials, Noel was alarmed by the fact that someone like Barack Obama could capture the presidency. For some unexplained reason, Obama was never vetted before he became a candidate for the presidency by the FBI. This is an unacceptable result of our national security system and is wholly suggestive of internal plot to allow the installation of a blatantly communist advocate into the highest political position in America

Quote:Conclusion
Because of the psychological principal, cognitive dissonance, no amount of direct or circumstantial proof would convince some people that the highest political position in the country has been compromised by a communist plot spanning several decades. The term cognitive dissonance refers to a person who received information so shocking, so upsetting, that they cannot adequately process that information and then instead deny the validity of the proof that anyone else could see. If you are one of the cognitive dissonance types, please allow me to ask you a few questions.

Who was Obama’s basketball coach in high school? The President has some degree of basketball skills as he defeated former NBA player and sports broadcaster, Clark Kellogg, in a game of pig (how appropriate) in front of a national TV audience. Who was Obama’s history teacher in high school? Why don’t we see interviews with his former professors, teachers, coaches, childhood friends and his first girl friend? Who in the hell is he? There are no visible answers to these questions are there? But still the cognitive dissonance crowd still persists with their abject denials. To them, I say let’s judge a man by his actions, not his words. Has Obama’s actions served to help or hurt America? Do his Presidential actions match up with his communist background? The answer to these questions will be the topic of part two of this series.
Never invite a Yoda to a frog leg dinner.
Go ahead invite Yoda to a Frog leg dinner
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)