• First Amendment Conflict

    From LowRider44M@1:229/2 to All on Saturday, August 19, 2017 16:00:55
    From: intraphase@gmail.com

    A Site Google Would Not Allow To Be Found

    50 Free Speech Advocates Defeated By 30,000 Anti-Free Speech Warriors https://www.facebook.com/va.shiva.ayyadurai/videos/1567741143282398/


    Dilbert Creator - Scott Adams http://blog.dilbert.com/post/164297628606/how-to-know-youre-in-a-mass-hysteria-bubble

    Scott Adams

    How To Know You’re In a Mass Hysteria Bubble

    Posted August 17th, 2017 @ 12:36pm

    History is full of examples of Mass Hysterias. They happen fairly often. The cool thing about mass hysterias is that you don’t know when you are in one. But sometimes the people who are not experiencing the mass hysteria can recognize when others are
    experiencing one, if they know what to look for.

    I’ll teach you what to look for.
    image

    A mass hysteria happens when the public gets a wrong idea about something that has strong emotional content and it triggers cognitive dissonance that is often
    supported by confirmation bias. In other words, people spontaneously hallucinate a whole new (
    and usually crazy-sounding) reality and believe they see plenty of evidence for
    it. The Salem Witch Trials are the best-known example of mass hysteria. The McMartin Pre-School case and the Tulip Bulb hysteria are others. The dotcom bubble probably
    qualifies. We might soon learn that the Russian Collusion story was mass hysteria in hindsight. The curious lack of solid evidence for Russian collusion
    is a red flag. But we’ll see how that plays out.

    The most visible Mass Hysteria of the moment involves the idea that the United States intentionally elected a racist President. If that statement just triggered you, it might mean you are in the Mass Hysteria bubble. The cool part
    is that you can’t
    fact-check my claim you are hallucinating if you are actually hallucinating. But you can read my description of the signs of mass hysteria and see if you check off the boxes.

    If you’re in the mass hysteria, recognizing you have all the symptoms of hysteria won’t help you be aware you are in it. That’s not how hallucinations work. Instead, your hallucination will automatically rewrite itself to expel any new data that
    conflicts with its illusions.

    But if you are not experiencing mass hysteria, you might be totally confused by
    the actions of the people who are. They appear to be irrational, but in ways that are hard to define. You can’t tell if they are stupid, unscrupulous, ignorant, mentally
    ill, emotionally unstable or what. It just looks frickin’ crazy.

    The reason you can’t easily identify what-the-hell is going on in the country
    right now is that a powerful mass hysteria is in play. If you see the signs after I point them out, you’re probably not in the hysteria bubble. If you read this and do NOT
    see the signs, it probably means you’re trapped inside the mass hysteria bubble.

    Here are some signs of mass hysteria. This is my own take on it, but I welcome you to fact-check it with experts on mass hysteria.

    1. The trigger event for cognitive dissonance

    On November 8th of 2016, half the country learned that everything they believed
    to be both true and obvious turned out to be wrong. The people who thought Trump had no chance of winning were under the impression they were smart people
    who understood
    their country, and politics, and how things work in general. When Trump won, they learned they were wrong. They were so very wrong that they reflexively (because this is how all brains work) rewrote the scripts they were seeing in their minds until it
    all made sense again. The wrong-about-everything crowd decided that the only way their world made sense, with their egos intact, is that either the Russians
    helped Trump win or there are far more racists in the country than they imagined, and he is their
    king. Those were the seeds of the two mass hysterias we witness today.

    Trump supporters experienced no trigger event for cognitive dissonance when Trump won. Their worldview was confirmed by observed events.

    2. The Ridiculousness of it

    One sign of a good mass hysteria is that it sounds bonkers to anyone who is not
    experiencing it. Imagine your neighbor telling you he thinks the other neighbor
    is a witch. Or imagine someone saying the local daycare provider is a satanic temple in
    disguise. Or imagine someone telling you tulip bulbs are more valuable than gold. Crazy stuff.

    Compare that to the idea that our president is a Russian puppet. Or that the country accidentally elected a racist who thinks the KKK and Nazis are “fine people.” Crazy stuff.

    If you think those examples don’t sound crazy – regardless of the reality – you are probably inside the mass hysteria bubble.

    3. The Confirmation Bias

    If you are inside the mass hysteria bubble, you probably interpreted President Trump’s initial statement on Charlottesville – which was politically imperfect to say the least – as proof-positive he is a damned racist.

    If you are outside the mass hysteria bubble you might have noticed that President Trump never campaigned to be our moral leader. He presented himself as – in his own words “no angel” – with a set of skills he offered to use in the public’s
    interest. He was big on law and order, and equal justice under the law. But he never offered moral leadership. Voters elected him with that knowledge. Evidently, Republicans don’t depend on politicians for moral leadership. That’s probably a good
    call.

    When the horror in Charlottesville shocked the country, citizens instinctively looked to their president for moral leadership. The president instead provided a generic law and order statement. Under pressure, he later named specific groups and disavowed
    the racists. He was clearly uncomfortable being our moral lighthouse. That’s probably why he never described his moral leadership as an asset when running for office. We observe that he has never been shy about any other skill he brings to the job, so
    it probably isn’t an accident when he avoids mentioning any ambitions for moral leadership. If he wanted us to know he would provide that service, I think he would have mentioned it by now.

    If you already believed President Trump is a racist, his weak statement about Charlottesville seems like confirmation. But if you believe he never offered moral leadership, only equal treatment under the law, that’s what you saw instead. And you made
    up your own mind about the morality.

    The tricky part here is that any interpretation of what happened could be confirmation bias. But ask yourself which one of these versions sounds less crazy:

    1. A sitting president, who is a branding expert, thought it would be a good idea to go easy on murderous Nazis as a way to improve his popularity.

    or…

    2. The country elected a racist leader who is winking to the KKK and White Supremacists that they have a free pass to start a race war now.

    or…

    3. A mentally unstable racist clown with conman skills (mostly just lying) eviscerated the Republican primary field and won the presidency. He keeps doing
    crazy, impulsive racist stuff. But for some reason, the economy is going well, jobs are looking
    good, North Korea blinked, ISIS is on the ropes, and the Supreme Court got a qualified judge. It was mostly luck.

    or…

    4. The guy who didn’t offer to be your moral leader didn’t offer any moral leadership, just law and order, applied equally. His critics cleverly and predictably framed it as being soft on Nazis.

    One of those narratives is less crazy-sounding than the others. That doesn’t mean the less-crazy one has to be true. But normal stuff happens far more often
    than crazy stuff. And critics will frame normal stuff as crazy whenever they get a chance.

    4. The Oversized Reaction

    It would be hard to overreact to a Nazi murder, or to racists marching in the streets with torches. That stuff demands a strong reaction. But if a Republican
    agrees with you that Nazis are the worst, and you threaten to punch that Republican for not
    agreeing with you exactly the right way, that might be an oversized reaction.

    5. The Insult without supporting argument

    When people have actual reasons for disagreeing with you, they offer those reasons without hesitation. Strangers on social media will cheerfully check your facts, your logic, and your assumptions. But when you start seeing ad hominem attacks that offer
    no reasons at all, that might be a sign that people in the mass hysteria bubble
    don’t understand what is wrong with your point of view except that it sounds more sensible than their own.

    For the past two days I have been disavowing Nazis on Twitter. The most common response from the people who agree with me is that my comic strip sucks and I am ugly.

    The mass hysteria signals I described here are not settled science, or anything
    like it. This is only my take on the topic, based on personal observation and years of experience with hypnosis and other forms of persuasion. I present this
    filter on the
    situation as the first step in dissolving the mass hysteria. It isn’t enough,
    but more persuasion is coming. If you are outside the mass hysteria bubble, you
    might see what I am doing in this blog as a valuable public service. If you are
    inside the
    mass hysteria bubble, I look like a Nazi collaborator.

    How do I look to you?



    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From LowRider44M@1:229/2 to All on Saturday, August 19, 2017 22:18:47
    From: intraphase@gmail.com

    A Scared Mentally Ill Kid Trapped In A Riot
    Verses
    Nazi White Supremacist Domestic Terrorist Expert

    Watch full screen.
    1:18 to 1:20 car is attacked.
    https://youtu.be/Wm81T6DVZe8?t=1m15s

    Involuntary Manslaughter - No Intent To Kill

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From LowRider44M@1:229/2 to All on Sunday, August 20, 2017 11:15:27
    From: intraphase@gmail.com

    Conspiracy To Incite A Riot.

    Michael Signer
    Terry McAuliffe

    Homicide In Commission Of A Riot

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From Jeremy H. Denisovan@1:229/2 to All on Tuesday, August 22, 2017 17:27:06
    From: david.j.worrell@gmail.com

    The relationship between President Trump and Senator Mitch McConnell,
    the majority leader, has now disintegrated to the point that they have
    not spoken to each other in weeks, and Mr. McConnell has privately
    expressed uncertainty that Mr. Trump will be able to salvage his administration.

    Not even Mitch McConnell thinks Trump's going to make it. :)

    In 6 major recent polls, Trump averages around 36.5 % approval.
    Since he got 46% of the popular vote (Clinton got 48%), that means
    Trump has lost a significant percentage of his own base. It amounts
    to over 6 million people who voted for him who no longer approve
    of the job he's doing.

    And those are people who liked the guy and voted for him.
    Just imagine how the rest of us feel by now...

    This can't be chalked up to "mass hysteria". Not even close. :)

    If there was only one instance when Trump acted suspiciously racist,
    then some accusations of racism might involve "hysteria", but there
    have been at least TEN such instances in Trump's history. Look them up
    if you're unaware of that.

    Then you have to ask... why do all the racist and white supremacist organizations support Trump? (They DO, and there's good reason why.)
    Even if he doesn't think he's their king, *they* sure do. :)

    And if the four major US agencies responsible for national security
    had not concluded that the Russians DID attempt to interfere with
    our election for the purpose of helping Trump and if it had not also
    been proven that the Trump campaign WAS approached by Russians who
    offered to help Trump beat Hillary, then "hysteria" might be a factor,
    but both of those events factually happened.

    I love Scott Adams' 'Dilbert', and even have some of his books.
    He should stick to the business world, which he knows very well.
    As a political cartoonist and pundit, he's not even in the top 10. :)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From LowRider44M@1:229/2 to All on Wednesday, August 23, 2017 15:40:43
    From: intraphase@gmail.com

    Analyze the timeline, your a tech savvy reader.

    The dossier, the hack, all BS.

    Seth Rich gave his life fighting for Bernie Sanders.

    ---


    NYT Russian Lawyer Story Proves Dems Helped Create Trump-Russia Conspiracy Theory
    Photo of Maxwell Anderson
    Maxwell Anderson
    Freelance Writer
    9:13 PM 07/10/2017
    358


    The New York Times published a story on Saturday that revealed Donald Trump Jr. met with Natalia Veselnitskaya, a “Russian lawyer who has connections to the Kremlin,” on June 9th, 2016. On Sunday, The Times followed up with a report that said Don Jr.
    “was promised damaging information about Hillary Clinton before agreeing to meet with [the] Kremlin-connected Russian lawyer during the 2016 campaign, . . .” Paul Manafort, President Trump’s campaign manager at the time, and Jared Kushner,
    President Trump’s son-in-law and current advisor, also attended the meeting, according to The Times.

    Of course, the typical figures are suggesting that this “proves” that collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government occurred during the election. But the critical detail of who sought to broker the meeting
  • From LowRider44M@1:229/2 to All on Wednesday, August 23, 2017 15:30:32
    From: intraphase@gmail.com

    ----


    Former NSA experts say it wasn’t a hack at all, but a leak—an inside job by
    someone with access to the DNC’s system.
    By Patrick Lawrence
    August 9, 2017

    It is now a year since the Democratic National Committee’s mail system was compromised—a year since events in the spring and early summer of 2016 were identified as remote hacks and, in short order, attributed to Russians acting in behalf of Donald
    Trump. A great edifice has been erected during this time. President Trump, members of his family, and numerous people around him stand accused of various corruptions and extensive collusion with Russians. Half a dozen simultaneous investigations proceed
    into these matters. Last week news broke that Special Counsel Robert Mueller had convened a grand jury, which issued its first subpoenas on August 3. Allegations of treason are common; prominent political figures and many media cultivate a case for
    impeachment.

    The president’s ability to conduct foreign policy, notably but not only with regard to Russia, is now crippled. Forced into a corner and having no choice, Trump just signed legislation imposing severe new sanctions on Russia and European companies
    working with it on pipeline projects vital to Russia’s energy sector. Striking this close to the core of another nation’s economy is customarily considered an act of war, we must not forget. In retaliation, Moscow has announced that the United States
    must cut its embassy staff by roughly two-thirds. All sides agree that relations between the United States and Russia are now as fragile as they were during some of the Cold War’s worst moments. To suggest that military conflict between two nuclear
    powers inches ever closer can no longer be dismissed as hyperbole.

    All this was set in motion when the DNC’s mail server was first violated in the spring of 2016 and by subsequent assertions that Russians were behind that “hack” and another such operation, also described as a Russian hack, on July 5. These are the
    foundation stones of the edifice just outlined. The evolution of public discourse in the year since is worthy of scholarly study: Possibilities became allegations, and these became probabilities. Then the probabilities turned into
    certainties, and these
    evolved into what are now taken to be established truths. By my reckoning, it required a few days to a few weeks to advance from each of these stages to the next. This was accomplished via the indefensibly corrupt manipulations of language repeated
    incessantly in our leading media.

    We are urged to accept the word of institutions and senior officials with long records of deception.

    Lost in a year that often appeared to veer into our peculiarly American kind of
    hysteria is the absence of any credible evidence of what happened last year and
    who was responsible for it. It is tiresome to note, but none has been made available. Instead,
    we are urged to accept the word of institutions and senior officials with long records of deception. These officials profess “high confidence” in their “assessment” as to what happened in the spring and summer of last year—this standing as
    their authoritative judgment. Few have noticed since these evasive terms first appeared that an assessment is an opinion, nothing more, and to express high confidence is an upside-down way of admitting the absence of certain knowledge.
    This is how
    officials avoid putting their names on the assertions we are so strongly urged to accept—as the record shows many of them have done.

    We come now to a moment of great gravity.

    There has been a long effort to counter the official narrative we now call “Russiagate.” This effort has so far focused on the key events noted above,
    leaving numerous others still to be addressed. Until recently, researchers undertaking this work
    faced critical shortcomings, and these are to be explained. But they have achieved significant new momentum in the past several weeks, and what they have
    done now yields very consequential fruit. Forensic investigators, intelligence analysts, system
    designers, program architects, and computer scientists of long experience and strongly credentialed are now producing evidence disproving the official version of key events last year. Their work is intricate and continues at a kinetic pace as we speak.
    But its certain results so far are two, simply stated, and freighted with implications:

    There was no hack of the Democratic National Committee’s system on July 5
    last year—not by the Russians, not by anyone else. Hard science now demonstrates it was a leak—a download executed locally with a memory key or a
    similarly portable data-
    storage device. In short, it was an inside job by someone with access to the DNC’s system. This casts serious doubt on the initial “hack,” as alleged,
    that led to the very consequential publication of a large store of documents on
    WikiLeaks last
    summer.

    Forensic investigations of documents made public two weeks prior to the July 5 leak by the person or entity known as Guccifer 2.0 show that they were fraudulent: Before Guccifer posted them they were adulterated by cutting and pasting them into a
    blank template that had Russian as its default language. Guccifer took responsibility on June 15 for an intrusion the DNC reported on June 14 and professed to be a WikiLeaks source—claims essential to the official narrative
    implicating Russia in what
    was soon cast as an extensive hacking operation. To put the point simply, forensic science now devastates this narrative.

    This article is based on an examination of the documents these forensic experts
    and intelligence analysts have produced, notably the key papers written over the past several weeks, as well as detailed interviews with many of those conducting
    investigations and now drawing conclusions from them. Before proceeding into this material, several points bear noting.


    One, there are many other allegations implicating Russians in the 2016 political process. The work I will now report upon does not purport to prove or
    disprove any of them. Who delivered documents to WikiLeaks? Who was responsible
    for the “phishing”
    operation penetrating John Podesta’s e-mail in March 2016? We do not know the
    answers to such questions. It is entirely possible, indeed, that the answers we
    deserve and must demand could turn out to be multiple: One thing happened in one case, another
    thing in another. The new work done on the mid-June and July 5 events bears upon all else in only one respect. We are now on notice: Given that we now stand face to face with very considerable cases of duplicity, it is imperative that all official
    accounts of these many events be subject to rigorously skeptical questioning. Do we even know that John Podesta’s e-mail address was in fact “phished”?
    What evidence of this has been produced? Such rock-bottom questions as these must now be posed
    in all other cases.

    Two, houses built on sand and made of cards are bound to collapse, and there can be no surprise that the one resting atop the “hack theory,” as we can call the prevailing wisdom on the DNC events, appears to be in the process of doing so. Neither is
    there anything far-fetched in a reversal of the truth of this magnitude. American history is replete with similar cases. The Spanish sank the Maine in Havana harbor in February 1898. Iran’s Mossadegh was a Communist. Guatemala’s Árbenz represented a
    Communist threat to the United States. Vietnam’s Ho Chi Minh was a Soviet puppet. The Sandinistas were Communists. The truth of the Maine, a war and a revolution in between, took a century to find the light of day, whereupon the official story
    disintegrated. We can do better now. It is an odd sensation to live through one
    of these episodes, especially one as big as Russiagate. But its place atop a long line of precedents can no longer be disputed.

    Forensic investigators, prominent among them people with decades’ experience at high levels in our national-security institutions, have put a body of evidence on a table previously left empty.

    Three, regardless of what one may think about the investigations and conclusions I will now outline—and, as noted, these investigations continue—there is a bottom line attaching to them. We can even call it a red line. Under no circumstance can it be
    acceptable that the relevant authorities—the National Security Agency, the Justice Department (via the Federal Bureau of Investigation), and the Central Intelligence Agency—leave these new findings without reply. Not credibly, in any case. Forensic
    investigators, prominent among them people with decades’ experience at high levels in these very institutions, have put a body of evidence on a table previously left empty. Silence now, should it ensue, cannot be written down as an admission of
    duplicity, but it will come very close to one.

    It requires no elaboration to apply the above point to the corporate media, which have been flaccidly satisfied with official explanations of the DNC matter from the start.

    Qualified experts working independently of one another began to examine the DNC
    case immediately after the July 2016 events. Prominent among these is a group comprising former intelligence officers, almost all of whom previously occupied
    senior positions.
    Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), founded in 2003, now has
    30 members, including a few associates with backgrounds in national-security fields other than intelligence. The chief researchers active on the DNC case are four: William
    Binney, formerly the NSA’s technical director for world geopolitical and military analysis and designer of many agency programs now in use; Kirk Wiebe, formerly a senior analyst at the NSA’s SIGINT Automation Research Center; Edward Loomis, formerly
    technical director in the NSA’s Office of Signal Processing; and Ray McGovern, an intelligence analyst for nearly three decades and formerly chief of the CIA’s Soviet Foreign Policy Branch. Most of these men have decades of experience in matters
    concerning Russian intelligence and the related technologies. This article reflects numerous interviews with all of them conducted in person, via Skype, or by telephone.

    The customary VIPS format is an open letter, typically addressed to the president. The group has written three such letters on the DNC incident, all of
    which were first published by Robert Parry at www.consortiumnews.com. Here is the latest, dated July
    24; it blueprints the forensic work this article explores in detail. They have all argued that the hack theory is wrong and that a locally executed leak is the far more likely explanation. In a letter to Barack Obama dated January 17, three days before
    he left office, the group explained that the NSA’s known programs are fully capable of capturing all electronic transfers of data. “We strongly suggest that you ask NSA for any evidence it may have indicating that the results of Russian hacking were
    given to WikiLeaks,” the letter said. “If NSA cannot produce such evidence—and quickly—this would probably mean it does not have any.”

    The day after Parry published this letter, Obama gave his last press conference
    as president, at which he delivered one of the great gems among the official statements on the DNC e-mail question. “The conclusions of the intelligence community with
    respect to the Russian hacking,” the legacy-minded Obama said, “were not conclusive.” There is little to suggest the VIPS letter prompted this remark,
    but it is typical of the linguistic tap-dancing many officials connected to the
    case have
    indulged so as to avoid putting their names on the hack theory and all that derives from it.

    Until recently there was a serious hindrance to the VIPS’s work, and I have just suggested it. The group lacked access to positive data. It had no lump of cyber-material to place on its lab table and analyze, because no official agency had provided any.

    Donald Rumsfeld famously argued with regard to the WMD question in Iraq, “The
    absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” In essence, Binney and others at VIPS say this logic turns upside down in the DNC case: Based on the knowledge of former
    officials such as Binney, the group knew that (1) if there was a hack and (2) if Russia was responsible for it, the NSA would have to have evidence of both. Binney and others surmised that the agency and associated institutions were hiding the absence of
    evidence behind the claim that they had to maintain secrecy to protect NSA programs. “Everything that they say must remain classified is already well-known,” Binney said in an interview. “They’re playing the Wizard of Oz game.”

    New findings indicate this is perfectly true, but until recently the VIPS experts could produce only “negative evidence,” as they put it: The absence
    of evidence supporting the hack theory demonstrates that it cannot be so. That is all VIPS had. They
    could allege and assert, but they could not conclude: They were stuck demanding
    evidence they did not have—if only to prove there was none.

    Research into the DNC case took a fateful turn in early July, when forensic investigators who had been working independently began to share findings and form loose collaborations.

    Research into the DNC case took a fateful turn in early July, when forensic investigators who had been working independently began to share findings and form loose collaborations wherein each could build on the work of others. In this a small, new
    website called www.disobedientmedia.com proved an important catalyst. Two independent researchers selected it, Snowden-like, as the medium through which to disclose their findings. One of these is known as Forensicator and the other
    as Adam Carter. On
    July 9, Adam Carter sent Elizabeth Vos, a co-founder of Disobedient Media, a paper by the Forensicator that split the DNC case open like a coconut.


    [continued in next message]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From Jeremy H. Denisovan@1:229/2 to All on Thursday, August 24, 2017 09:05:23
    From: david.j.worrell@gmail.com

    On Wednesday, August 23, 2017 at 3:30:33 PM UTC-7, LowRider44M wrote:
    ----


    Former NSA experts say it wasn’t a hack at all, but a leak—an inside job
    by someone with access to the DNC’s system.

    This rather weak article attempts to spin only ONE major issue
    out of more than half-a-dozen major issues raised in the 25-page
    'Intelligence Report on Russian Hacking' made by The Office
    of the Director of National Intelligence.

    To give a few examples, the official report notes how the Russians:

    1. have been making numerous cyber attacks for many years
    2. attacked targets in *both* major parties, although overall
    the attacks greatly favored Trump
    3. attacked systems at State and Local Electoral Boards as well
    4. targeted the World Anti-Doping Agency as well
    5. changed tactics near the end, because they too thought that
    Clinton was going to win
    6. collected info on other major think tanks and lobbying groups,
    not just the DNC.

    An interesting detail revealed in the official Report is that
    Russian intelligence first accessed DNC systems in July 2015,
    and maintained access for *11 months* until at least June 2016.
    It says Russian intelligence began extracting volumes of DNC email
    data in March 2016, *months* before any was actually released,
    and a full month before ANY event in your little 'timeline'. :)

    That article you posted is focused only on what happened in June
    and July 2016, but the feds had evidence the Russians were in the
    DNC system long before all of that. The feds also reported that
    there was confusion about Guccifer 2.0 because "more than one person
    claiming to be Guccifer 2.0 interacted with journalists".

    DNC statement:
    “U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded the Russian government
    hacked the DNC in an attempt to interfere in the election.
    Any suggestion otherwise is false and is just another conspiracy theory
    like those pushed by Trump and his administration. It’s unfortunate
    that The Nation has decided to join the conspiracy theorists to push
    this narrative.”

    Exactly. And you, LowRider, are just another conspiracy theorist.
    You drank the damn Kool-Aid. :)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From Jeremy H. Denisovan@1:229/2 to All on Thursday, August 24, 2017 09:11:08
    From: david.j.worrell@gmail.com

    On Wednesday, August 23, 2017 at 3:40:44 PM UTC-7, LowRider44M wrote:
    Analyze the timeline, your a tech savvy reader.

    The dossier, the hack, all BS.

    Seth Rich gave his life fighting for Bernie Sanders.

    ---


    NYT Russian Lawyer Story Proves Dems Helped Create Trump-Russia Conspiracy
    Theory
    Photo of Maxwell Anderson
    Maxwell Anderson
    Freelance Writer

    This article is even weaker than the other one. It's completely stupid.

    Donald Trump Jr. released his own emails that by themselves
    prove he DID know what was going on before he met the Russians.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From Jeremy H. Denisovan@1:229/2 to All on Thursday, August 24, 2017 09:19:31
    From: david.j.worrell@gmail.com

    Equally idiotic is how they took Adam Schiff's words
    completely out of context.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From Jeremy H. Denisovan@1:229/2 to All on Thursday, August 24, 2017 14:40:35
    From: david.j.worrell@gmail.com

    On Wednesday, August 23, 2017 at 3:40:44 PM UTC-7, LowRider44M wrote:
    Analyze the timeline, your a tech savvy reader.

    The dossier, the hack, all BS.

    Seth Rich gave his life fighting for Bernie Sanders.

    ---


    NYT Russian Lawyer Story Proves Dems Helped Create Trump-Russia Conspiracy
    Theory
    Photo of Maxwell Anderson
    Maxwell Anderson
    Freelance Writer
    9:13 PM 07/10/2017
    358


    The New York Times published a story on Saturday that revealed Donald Trump
    Jr. met with Natalia Veselnitskaya, a “Russian lawyer who has connections to the Kremlin,” on June 9th, 2016. On Sunday, The Times followed up with a report that said Don
    Jr. “was promised damaging information about Hillary Clinton before agreeing to meet with [the] Kremlin-connected Russian lawyer during the 2016 campaign, .
    . .” Paul Manafort, President Trump’s campaign manager at the time, and Jared Kushner,
    President Trump’s son-in-law and current advisor, also attended the meeting, according to The Times.

    Of course, the typical figures are suggesting that this “proves” that
    collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government occurred during
    the election. But the critical detail of who sought to broker the meeting is wholly omitted in
    both of The Times’ reports. In a statement to The Times, Don Jr. said, “I was asked to attend the meeting by an acquaintance, but was not told the name of the person I would be meeting with beforehand.” This individual’s name has not officially
    been revealed. The Washington Post suggested the person was Rob Goldstone, a music publicist and personal friend of Don Jr. Don Jr. has neither confirmed nor denied Goldstone’s involvement.

    Okay, that is a truly ridiculous crock. It almost qualifies as
    "fake news". Goldstone was *obviously* involved. He sent the first
    email on it. And so what if little Donnie wasn't told the Russian
    lawyer's NAME in the first email. What possible difference does
    that really make?

    Below is the email Donny Jr got from Goldstone, which HE published.

    ***

    On Jun 3, 2016, at 10:36 AM, Rob Goldstone wrote:

    Good morning

    Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting. The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very
    useful to your father.

    This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump - helped along by Aras and Emin.

    What do you think is the best way to handle this information and would you be able to speak to Emin about it directly?

    I can also send this info to your father via Rhona, but it is ultra sensitive so wanted to send to you first.

    Best
    Rob Goldstone

    ***

    So obviously little Donny knew who was asking and what it was about.
    It is totally clear it involves high level Russian operatives.

    ***

    On Jun 3, 2016, at 10:53, Donald Trump Jr. wrote:

    Thanks Rob I appreciate that. I am on the road at the moment but perhaps I just
    speak to Emin first. Seems we have some time and if it's what you say I love it
    especially later in the summer. Could we do a call first thing next week when I
    am back?

    Best,
    Don

    ***

    Little Donnie says he loves it, and wants to do a call on it.
    And there's evidence they DID do a call on it too.
    That's why Goldstone implies later that he's "aware of" the meeting.

    ***
    Skipping some of the stuff...
    ***

    On Jun 7, 2016, at 4:20 PM, Rob Goldstone wrote:

    Don

    Hope all is well

    Emin asked that I schedule a meeting with you and The Russian government attorney who is flying over from Moscow for this Thursday.

    I believe you are aware of the meeting - and so wondered if 3pm or later on Thursday works for you?

    I assume it would be at your office.

    Best
    Rob Goldstone

    ***

    On Jun 7, 2016, at 5:16 PM, Donald Trump Jr. wrote:

    How about 3 at our offices? Thanks rob appreciate you helping set it up.

    D

    ***

    So "Emin" and Goldstone obviously helped Donnie set up the meeting
    with the Russian lawyer.

    ***

    Now, back to your bullshit:
    Whoever the acquaintance was, subsequent reporting by Circa News said that
    members of the President’s legal team have confirmed that the acquaintance “who sought the meeting is associated with Fusion GPS.” Based on other contemporaneous events,
    this account seems highly probable.

    Huh? What "acquaintance who sought the meeting?"
    This is a completely insubstantial claim.

    As Donnie's own email shows: "The Crown Prosecutor of Russia"
    (Natalia Veselnitskaya) and "his father Aras", via "Emin" and
    "Rob Goldstone" sought to set up the meeting. And then they
    followed through and actually did set it up. Duh.


    It is important to remember exactly what was transpiring in the late spring
    and early summer of 2016. Specifically, the key timeframe is April-June 2016. It was during this time that three different event trajectories converged: (1) Trump becoming the
    presumptive Republican nominee, (2) the Democratic National Committee (DNC) learning and disclosing that Russian hackers penetrated its computer network, and (3) Democratic Party operatives hiring Fusion GPS to conduct opposition research on Trump.

    And none of that has anything to do with the price of tea in China.


    Trump became the presumptive GOP nominee either in late April or early May,
    depending on who you ask. Trump declared himself to be the presumptive nominee on April 26th, after sweeping the primary election contests in Connecticut, Delaware, Rhode
    Island, Maryland and Pennsylvania. One week later, on May 3rd, then-chairman of
    the Republican National Committee Reince Priebus declared Trump to be the presumptive nominee after Trump emerged victorious from the heavily contested Indiana primary
    contest, which led Republican Texas Senator Ted Cruz to drop out of the race.

    So what?


    Trump’s presumptive nomination is significant here for other, less obvious
    reasons. That is because, according to The New York Times, during the Republican primaries,

    a wealthy Republican donor who strongly opposed Mr. Trump put up the
    money to hire a Washington research firm run by former journalists, Fusion GPS,
    to compile a dossier about the real estate magnate’s past scandals and weaknesses.

    Yep. And?


    However, The Times continued,

    After Mr. Trump emerged as the presumptive nominee in the spring, the
    Republican interest in financing the effort ended. But Democratic supporters of
    Hillary Clinton were very interested, and Fusion GPS kept doing the same deep dives, but on behalf
    of new clients.

    Yep. And?


    Until this time, there was no known coordinated effort to investigate
    Trump’s alleged “ties” to Russia. But, as The Times noted, that all changed in June:

    Really? That's your big theory?

    That is laughable. Trump's "alleged ties" to Russia? Ha ha ha!
    Paul Manaforte, Trump's first campaign chair, resigned just two
    months later partly over major pressure regarding his actual ties
    to Russian oligarchs. Trump's first National Security Advisor
    Michael Flynn would also end up resigning over his ties to and
    conversations with the Russians. Two other major Trump advisors,
    Carter Page and Roger Stone were both shown to have ties to Russia
    as well.

    That's far from all the connections; I'm just tired of listing them. http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/03/connections-trump-putin-russia-ties-chart-flynn-page-manafort-sessions-214868


    In June, the tenor of the effort suddenly changed. The Washington Post
    reported that the Democratic National Committee had been hacked, apparently by Russian government agents, and a mysterious figure calling himself “Guccifer 2.0” began to publish
    the stolen documents online.

    The above-mentioned Washington Post article was published on June 14th, 2016.
    What The Post did not note, however, was that the DNC knew Russia was behind the hack long before its article was published.

    Public reports confirm the DNC’s early knowledge of Russia’s involvement
    in the hack. The Washington Post article says “DNC leaders were tipped to the
    hack in late April.” The specific date, according to a separate report from The New York
    Times, was “[t]he day before the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner,” which occurred on April 30th, meaning that the DNC was notified of the intrusion on April 29th. Within 24 hours of the notification, The Times reported, the DNC “
    hired CrowdStrike, a cyber security firm,” which The Washington Post said “installed software on the DNC’s computers so that it could analyze data that could indicate who had gained access, when and how.” A DNC lawyer told The Times that, “
    Within a day, CrowdStrike confirmed that the intrusion had originated in Russia.”

    This means the DNC knew Russia was behind the hack of their computer network
    on May 1st, 2016.

    No shit, Sherlock. So Crowdstrike confirmed Russia hacked the DNC.
    The truth is, THREE different cybersecurity firms confirmed it.
    Not just Crowdstrike.

    And our National Security Agencies also confirmed Russia
    was hacking into all kinds of stuff, including the DNC,
    and most of it was in an attempt to help Trump.


    From this the following timeline emerges:

    April 26th, 2016: Trump declares himself the presumptive GOP nominee.
    April 29th, 2016: DNC learns its computer system has been breached.
    April 30th, 2016: DNC hires CrowdStrike.
    [Late April-Early May]: Democrats begin funding Fusion GPS.
    May 1st, 2016: CrowdStrike determines Russia perpetrated the hack.
    May 3rd, 2016: Reince Priebus declares Trump the presumptive GOP nominee.
    June 9th, 2016: Don Jr. meets with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya
    at the apparent request of a Fusion GPS operative.
    June 14th, 2016: The DNC publicly discloses the Russia hacked its
    computer network.

    Except there was no "apparent request of a Fusion GPS operative".

    That is your desperate revisionist attempt to spin it all to create
    the insinuation of some conspiracy theory. Back then nobody had any
    idea Donnie Jr. met with Russians. Nobody even knew about that.
    And yet you buy this shit?


    The DNC refused to disclose that Russia hacked its computer network for a
    month-and-a-half, and only disclosed that fact after the Fusion GPS-brokered meeting between Don Jr. and Veselnitskaya.

    Yes, and they only disclosed it right after a terrorist shot
    up that Night Club in Orlando, killing 49, but that had nothing
    to do with the meeting between Don Jr. and Veselnitskaya either. :)


    There is another disturbing aspect of this story. Recall that Don Jr., in
    both of his statements, said he was never told the name of the individual with whom he was meeting. (Neither story even indicates that Don Jr. knew before the
    meeting that the
    individual was a Russian national, let alone a Russian lawyer.)

    Complete nonsense. The first email Goldstone sent little Donnie
    clearly indicated it WAS a meeting with high-level Russians.


    This strongly suggests that Fusion GPS was involved in a dirty tricks campaign
    that sought to question and undermine Trump’s loyalty to the country by portraying him as a having close ties to the Kremlin, a tactic that has emerged
    as a primary point
    of opposition to candidate and now President Trump.

    No evidence in any way connects Fusion GPS to the meeting between
    Trump Jr. and the Russians. Nothing except you asserting it
    to create your stupid little conspiracy theory.


    Particularly troubling is how early the Democratic Party operatives appear to have been conspiring to make the Russia-Trump connection.

    LOL. At least half-a-dozen of Trump's people have been *proved*
    to not only have Russian connections, but to have LIED about their
    connections at least once to boot.

    No one needed to "conspire" to make it "appear" that Trump had
    Russia connections. Jesus, his staff had so many Russia connections
    it's almost hard to find one of his major appointees or staff members
    who DIDN'T have Russia connections. :)


    These revelations bring to light for the first time the likely involvement of
    Democratic operatives in fomenting the Russia-Trump collusion conspiracy theory
    that is now the subject of multiple Federal and Congressional investigations, which have had
    the (convenient) effect of slowing Trump’s legislative agenda.

    Indeed, the fact that the DNC knew, but kept secret, the fact that Russian
    hackers were responsible for their computer breach at around the same time that
    Democratic operatives began funding the group that would go on to broker a meeting between Trump
    s inner circle and a high-profile Russian national appears highly sinister.

    Indeed, you have NOT shown some unknown "Democratic operatives"
    brokered the meeting between Donnie Jr and the Russians. Jesus.
    That's pure bunk.

    The DNC probably didn't want to advertise they had been hacked until
    they had time to look into it themselves, that's all. It makes them
    look bad, and any sane organization would be tempted to try to get a
    better handle on what happened before revealing it in public.

    But no, it all just had to be part of some dastardly conspiracy. :)
    And if it wasn't, you're going to make one up.


    At the very least, these circumstances warrant an investigation, something
    that I am confident California Democratic Representative Adam Schiff, the most outspoken Democrat on the Russia conspiracy theory, would support.

    I feel certain that Schiff himself would tell you what a clueless
    dick stain you are.


    On the issue of circumstantial evidence acting as the basis for federal investigations, I’ll give Schiff the last word and let his words speak for themselves:

    Is it possible that all of these events and reports are completely
    unrelated, and nothing more than an entirely unhappy coincidence? Yes, it is possible. But it is also possible, maybe more than possible, that they are not coincidental, not
    disconnected and not unrelated, . . . We simply don’t know, not yet, and we owe it to the country to find out.

    When Schiff said that, he was laying out what he considered to be
    a mountain of evidence tying Trump to Russia. :) Since you posted
    this garbage, I insist that you go read every word Schiff really
    said in context:

    http://www.businessinsider.com/adam-schiff-trump-russia-connections-ties-evidence-2017-3


    [continued in next message]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From LowRider44M@1:229/2 to All on Friday, August 25, 2017 00:33:14
    From: intraphase@gmail.com

    I'm coming back to read yours when I can read it slow and thoughtfully.

    Felt bad for everybody in "Charlotte Ville"
    Prayed for All, the Good the Bad & the Ugly.



    Studio work for "Hey Jude"
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uiCmgEqgPcs

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From LowRider44M@1:229/2 to All on Friday, August 25, 2017 00:42:22
    From: intraphase@gmail.com

    :Felt bad for everybody in "Charlotte Ville"
    :Prayed for All, the Good the Bad & the Ugly.


    Studio work for "Hey Jude"
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uiCmgEqgPcs

    Hey Jude - Now or Never Version
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_MjCqQoLLA

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From Jeremy H. Denisovan@1:229/2 to All on Friday, August 25, 2017 11:48:37
    From: david.j.worrell@gmail.com

    Fantastic 'Hey Jude' material. :) Great stuff...

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From LowRider44M@1:229/2 to Jeremy H. Denisovan on Friday, August 25, 2017 12:33:15
    From: intraphase@gmail.com

    On Friday, August 25, 2017 at 2:48:38 PM UTC-4, Jeremy H. Denisovan wrote:
    Fantastic 'Hey Jude' material. :) Great stuff...

    The Sun and Sea.
    The opposing forces.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AsWz3ksIlI

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From LowRider44M@1:229/2 to Jeremy H. Denisovan on Friday, August 25, 2017 12:53:16
    From: intraphase@gmail.com

    On Tuesday, August 22, 2017 at 8:27:07 PM UTC-4, Jeremy H. Denisovan wrote:
    The relationship between President Trump and Senator Mitch McConnell,
    the majority leader, has now disintegrated to the point that they have
    not spoken to each other in weeks, and Mr. McConnell has privately
    expressed uncertainty that Mr. Trump will be able to salvage his administration.

    Not even Mitch McConnell thinks Trump's going to make it. :)

    In terms of a battle his position is noteworthy.
    Basically Trump called him a punk.

    I have no opinion on Obamacare


    In 6 major recent polls, Trump averages around 36.5 % approval.
    Since he got 46% of the popular vote (Clinton got 48%), that means
    Trump has lost a significant percentage of his own base. It amounts
    to over 6 million people who voted for him who no longer approve
    of the job he's doing.


    I don't give polls much credit.
    Everyone who voted knew he was not a "moral" leader.
    People want him to be a religious figure "avatar" and he won't play like that.

    And those are people who liked the guy and voted for him.
    Just imagine how the rest of us feel by now...


    The constant whirlwind is a deliberate function of the battle.

    This can't be chalked up to "mass hysteria". Not even close. :)


    We have a system, it would not survive without adherence to the constitution.

    If there was only one instance when Trump acted suspiciously racist,
    then some accusations of racism might involve "hysteria", but there
    have been at least TEN such instances in Trump's history. Look them up
    if you're unaware of that.


    There are mixed opinions on both sides.
    I no longer know what the term "racist" means.
    I live in 10% black African, 10% brown Cape Verdean, 50% white Portuguese,
    30% white European. Just about everyone here is also 1-12.5 native American. I'm in a world renowned whaling port.

    Then you have to ask... why do all the racist and white supremacist organizations support Trump? (They DO, and there's good reason why.)
    Even if he doesn't think he's their king, *they* sure do. :)


    Everyone in my area of all races are angry about open borders.

    And if the four major US agencies responsible for national security
    had not concluded that the Russians DID attempt to interfere with
    our election for the purpose of helping Trump and if it had not also
    been proven that the Trump campaign WAS approached by Russians who
    offered to help Trump beat Hillary, then "hysteria" might be a factor,
    but both of those events factually happened.

    That's politics. In 2010 their was the russo-american lovefest called "Reset." We got Yeltsin elected over there and he built an oligarchy of crime bosses.

    Why do American globalist interfere in all elections, including Israel.


    I love Scott Adams' 'Dilbert', and even have some of his books.
    He should stick to the business world, which he knows very well.
    As a political cartoonist and pundit, he's not even in the top 10. :)

    The merits of the article were based on "Nazi" memes.
    I embrace the past because it lead to this very moment.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From LowRider44M@1:229/2 to Jeremy H. Denisovan on Friday, August 25, 2017 13:04:37
    From: intraphase@gmail.com

    On Thursday, August 24, 2017 at 12:05:24 PM UTC-4, Jeremy H. Denisovan wrote:
    On Wednesday, August 23, 2017 at 3:30:33 PM UTC-7, LowRider44M wrote:
    ----


    Former NSA experts say it wasn’t a hack at all, but a leak—an inside
    job by someone with access to the DNC’s system.

    This rather weak article attempts to spin only ONE major issue
    out of more than half-a-dozen major issues raised in the 25-page 'Intelligence Report on Russian Hacking' made by The Office
    of the Director of National Intelligence.

    To give a few examples, the official report notes how the Russians:

    1. have been making numerous cyber attacks for many years
    2. attacked targets in *both* major parties, although overall
    the attacks greatly favored Trump
    3. attacked systems at State and Local Electoral Boards as well
    4. targeted the World Anti-Doping Agency as well
    5. changed tactics near the end, because they too thought that
    Clinton was going to win
    6. collected info on other major think tanks and lobbying groups,
    not just the DNC.

    An interesting detail revealed in the official Report is that
    Russian intelligence first accessed DNC systems in July 2015,
    and maintained access for *11 months* until at least June 2016.
    It says Russian intelligence began extracting volumes of DNC email
    data in March 2016, *months* before any was actually released,
    and a full month before ANY event in your little 'timeline'. :)

    That article you posted is focused only on what happened in June
    and July 2016, but the feds had evidence the Russians were in the
    DNC system long before all of that. The feds also reported that
    there was confusion about Guccifer 2.0 because "more than one person
    claiming to be Guccifer 2.0 interacted with journalists".

    DNC statement:
    “U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded the Russian government
    hacked the DNC in an attempt to interfere in the election.
    Any suggestion otherwise is false and is just another conspiracy theory
    like those pushed by Trump and his administration. It’s unfortunate
    that The Nation has decided to join the conspiracy theorists to push
    this narrative.”

    Exactly. And you, LowRider, are just another conspiracy theorist.
    You drank the damn Kool-Aid. :)

    I am wagering the stolen emails were an inside job and Seth Rich was the actor. That is my postulate, conjecture, reasoned estimate I shall try to disprove by reading all sources.

    Your counter argument is sound.

    As to the kool-aid.
    I only drink it when I have to.
    To stop McCain in 2008 I drank it.
    To stop Clinton in 2016 I drank it.
    To stop Kennedy in 1960 I drank it

    The organism that is humanity has self preservation instincts.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From LowRider44M@1:229/2 to Jeremy H. Denisovan on Friday, August 25, 2017 13:06:01
    From: intraphase@gmail.com

    On Thursday, August 24, 2017 at 12:11:09 PM UTC-4, Jeremy H. Denisovan wrote:
    On Wednesday, August 23, 2017 at 3:40:44 PM UTC-7, LowRider44M wrote:
    Analyze the timeline, your a tech savvy reader.

    The dossier, the hack, all BS.

    Seth Rich gave his life fighting for Bernie Sanders.

    ---


    NYT Russian Lawyer Story Proves Dems Helped Create Trump-Russia Conspiracy
    Theory
    Photo of Maxwell Anderson
    Maxwell Anderson
    Freelance Writer

    This article is even weaker than the other one. It's completely stupid.

    Donald Trump Jr. released his own emails that by themselves
    prove he DID know what was going on before he met the Russians.

    It's like a zombie meme now.
    The story shall fade away the final judgement never formed.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From totallyfucked@1:229/2 to All on Friday, August 25, 2017 15:18:14
    From: allreadydun@gmail.com

    HTBWFY lately?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From LowRider44M@1:229/2 to All on Friday, August 25, 2017 14:19:27
    From: intraphase@gmail.com

    A top dem on msnbc wanting to force ID out of GPS-Simpson. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-OSd_D_PEA



    This is how democrats rebuild.
    Assert authority to demand answers and let people measure their personal opinions.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From LowRider44M@1:229/2 to Jeremy H. Denisovan on Friday, August 25, 2017 13:32:05
    From: intraphase@gmail.com

    On Thursday, August 24, 2017 at 5:40:36 PM UTC-4, Jeremy H. Denisovan wrote:
    On Wednesday, August 23, 2017 at 3:40:44 PM UTC-7, LowRider44M wrote:
    Analyze the timeline, your a tech savvy reader.

    The dossier, the hack, all BS.

    Seth Rich gave his life fighting for Bernie Sanders.

    ---


    NYT Russian Lawyer Story Proves Dems Helped Create Trump-Russia Conspiracy
    Theory
    Photo of Maxwell Anderson
    Maxwell Anderson
    Freelance Writer
    9:13 PM 07/10/2017
    358


    The New York Times published a story on Saturday that revealed Donald Trump
    Jr. met with Natalia Veselnitskaya, a “Russian lawyer who has connections to the Kremlin,” on June 9th, 2016. On Sunday, The Times followed up with a report that said Don
    Jr. “was promised damaging information about Hillary Clinton before agreeing to meet with [the] Kremlin-connected Russian lawyer during the 2016 campaign, .
    . .” Paul Manafort, President Trump’s campaign manager at the time, and Jared Kushner,
    President Trump’s son-in-law and current advisor, also attended the meeting, according to The Times.

    Of course, the typical figures are suggesting that this “proves” that
    collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government occurred during
    the election. But the critical detail of who sought to broker the meeting is wholly omitted in
    both of The Times’ reports. In a statement to The Times, Don Jr. said, “I was asked to attend the meeting by an acquaintance, but was not told the name of the person I would be meeting with beforehand.” This individual’s name has not officially
    been revealed. The Washington Post suggested the person was Rob Goldstone, a music publicist and personal friend of Don Jr. Don Jr. has neither confirmed nor denied Goldstone’s involvement.

    Okay, that is a truly ridiculous crock. It almost qualifies as
    "fake news". Goldstone was *obviously* involved. He sent the first
    email on it. And so what if little Donnie wasn't told the Russian
    lawyer's NAME in the first email. What possible difference does
    that really make?

    Below is the email Donny Jr got from Goldstone, which HE published.

    ***

    On Jun 3, 2016, at 10:36 AM, Rob Goldstone wrote:

    Good morning

    Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting. The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in
    their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very
    useful to your father.

    This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of
    Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump - helped along by Aras and Emin.

    What do you think is the best way to handle this information and would you be
    able to speak to Emin about it directly?

    I can also send this info to your father via Rhona, but it is ultra sensitive
    so wanted to send to you first.

    Best
    Rob Goldstone

    ***

    So obviously little Donny knew who was asking and what it was about.
    It is totally clear it involves high level Russian operatives.

    ***

    On Jun 3, 2016, at 10:53, Donald Trump Jr. wrote:

    Thanks Rob I appreciate that. I am on the road at the moment but perhaps I
    just speak to Emin first. Seems we have some time and if it's what you say I love it especially later in the summer. Could we do a call first thing next week when I am back?

    Best,
    Don

    ***

    Little Donnie says he loves it, and wants to do a call on it.
    And there's evidence they DID do a call on it too.
    That's why Goldstone implies later that he's "aware of" the meeting.

    ***
    Skipping some of the stuff...
    ***

    On Jun 7, 2016, at 4:20 PM, Rob Goldstone wrote:

    Don

    Hope all is well

    Emin asked that I schedule a meeting with you and The Russian government
    attorney who is flying over from Moscow for this Thursday.

    I believe you are aware of the meeting - and so wondered if 3pm or later on
    Thursday works for you?

    I assume it would be at your office.

    Best
    Rob Goldstone

    ***

    On Jun 7, 2016, at 5:16 PM, Donald Trump Jr. wrote:

    How about 3 at our offices? Thanks rob appreciate you helping set it up.

    D

    ***

    So "Emin" and Goldstone obviously helped Donnie set up the meeting
    with the Russian lawyer.

    ***

    Now, back to your bullshit:
    Whoever the acquaintance was, subsequent reporting by Circa News said that
    members of the President’s legal team have confirmed that the acquaintance “who sought the meeting is associated with Fusion GPS.” Based on other contemporaneous events,
    this account seems highly probable.

    Huh? What "acquaintance who sought the meeting?"
    This is a completely insubstantial claim.

    As Donnie's own email shows: "The Crown Prosecutor of Russia"
    (Natalia Veselnitskaya) and "his father Aras", via "Emin" and
    "Rob Goldstone" sought to set up the meeting. And then they
    followed through and actually did set it up. Duh.


    It is important to remember exactly what was transpiring in the late spring
    and early summer of 2016. Specifically, the key timeframe is April-June 2016. It was during this time that three different event trajectories converged: (1) Trump becoming
    the presumptive Republican nominee, (2) the Democratic National Committee (DNC)
    learning and disclosing that Russian hackers penetrated its computer network, and (3) Democratic Party operatives hiring Fusion GPS to conduct opposition research on Trump.

    And none of that has anything to do with the price of tea in China.


    In legal parlance: method, motive and opportunity to obstruct
    any investigations a new administration might pursue.


    Trump became the presumptive GOP nominee either in late April or early May,
    depending on who you ask. Trump declared himself to be the presumptive nominee on April 26th, after sweeping the primary election contests in Connecticut, Delaware, Rhode
    Island, Maryland and Pennsylvania. One week later, on May 3rd, then-chairman of
    the Republican National Committee Reince Priebus declared Trump to be the presumptive nominee after Trump emerged victorious from the heavily contested Indiana primary
    contest, which led Republican Texas Senator Ted Cruz to drop out of the race.

    So what?


    Trump’s presumptive nomination is significant here for other, less
    obvious reasons. That is because, according to The New York Times, during the Republican primaries,

    a wealthy Republican donor who strongly opposed Mr. Trump put up the
    money to hire a Washington research firm run by former journalists, Fusion GPS,
    to compile a dossier about the real estate magnate’s past scandals and weaknesses.

    Yep. And?


    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/08/russian-who-attended-trump-meeting-almost-definitely-a-spy.html



    However, The Times continued,

    After Mr. Trump emerged as the presumptive nominee in the spring, the
    Republican interest in financing the effort ended. But Democratic supporters of
    Hillary Clinton were very interested, and Fusion GPS kept doing the same deep dives, but on
    behalf of new clients.

    Yep. And?


    Until this time, there was no known coordinated effort to investigate
    Trump’s alleged “ties” to Russia. But, as The Times noted, that all changed in June:

    Really? That's your big theory?

    That is the Times theory.


    That is laughable. Trump's "alleged ties" to Russia? Ha ha ha!
    Paul Manaforte, Trump's first campaign chair, resigned just two
    months later partly over major pressure regarding his actual ties
    to Russian oligarchs. Trump's first National Security Advisor
    Michael Flynn would also end up resigning over his ties to and
    conversations with the Russians. Two other major Trump advisors,
    Carter Page and Roger Stone were both shown to have ties to Russia
    as well.


    He was dismissed.

    That's far from all the connections; I'm just tired of listing them. http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/03/connections-trump-putin-russia-ties-chart-flynn-page-manafort-sessions-214868


    In June, the tenor of the effort suddenly changed. The Washington Post
    reported that the Democratic National Committee had been hacked, apparently by Russian government agents, and a mysterious figure calling himself “Guccifer 2.0” began to
    publish the stolen documents online.

    The above-mentioned Washington Post article was published on June 14th,
    2016. What The Post did not note, however, was that the DNC knew Russia was behind the hack long before its article was published.

    Public reports confirm the DNC’s early knowledge of Russia’s
    involvement in the hack. The Washington Post article says “DNC leaders were tipped to the hack in late April.” The specific date, according to a separate
    report from The New York
    Times, was “[t]he day before the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner,” which occurred on April 30th, meaning that the DNC was notified of the intrusion on April 29th. Within 24 hours of the notification, The Times reported, the DNC “
    hired CrowdStrike, a cyber security firm,” which The Washington Post said “installed software on the DNC’s computers so that it could analyze data that could indicate who had gained access, when and how.” A DNC lawyer told The Times that, “
    Within a day, CrowdStrike confirmed that the intrusion had originated in Russia.”


    The FBI was the proper counter intelligence authority.
    Still no one deemed objective has been allowed to see the server.

    This means the DNC knew Russia was behind the hack of their computer
    network on May 1st, 2016.

    No shit, Sherlock. So Crowdstrike confirmed Russia hacked the DNC.
    The truth is, THREE different cybersecurity firms confirmed it.
    Not just Crowdstrike.

    And our National Security Agencies also confirmed Russia
    was hacking into all kinds of stuff, including the DNC,
    and most of it was in an attempt to help Trump.


    A team of handpicked team of 6-8 people from only four agencies not 17.


    From this the following timeline emerges:

    April 26th, 2016: Trump declares himself the presumptive GOP nominee.
    April 29th, 2016: DNC learns its computer system has been breached.
    April 30th, 2016: DNC hires CrowdStrike.
    [Late April-Early May]: Democrats begin funding Fusion GPS.
    May 1st, 2016: CrowdStrike determines Russia perpetrated the hack.
    May 3rd, 2016: Reince Priebus declares Trump the presumptive GOP
    nominee.
    June 9th, 2016: Don Jr. meets with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya
    at the apparent request of a Fusion GPS operative.
    June 14th, 2016: The DNC publicly discloses the Russia hacked its
    computer network.

    Except there was no "apparent request of a Fusion GPS operative".

    That is your desperate revisionist attempt to spin it all to create
    the insinuation of some conspiracy theory. Back then nobody had any
    idea Donnie Jr. met with Russians. Nobody even knew about that.
    And yet you buy this shit?


    All of war is the art of deception.
    The search for facts is not a conspiracy theory.


    The DNC refused to disclose that Russia hacked its computer network for a
    month-and-a-half, and only disclosed that fact after the Fusion GPS-brokered meeting between Don Jr. and Veselnitskaya.

    Yes, and they only disclosed it right after a terrorist shot
    up that Night Club in Orlando, killing 49, but that had nothing
    to do with the meeting between Don Jr. and Veselnitskaya either. :)


    Obfuscation.


    There is another disturbing aspect of this story. Recall that Don Jr., in
    both of his statements, said he was never told the name of the individual with whom he was meeting. (Neither story even indicates that Don Jr. knew before the
    meeting that the
    individual was a Russian national, let alone a Russian lawyer.)

    Complete nonsense. The first email Goldstone sent little Donnie
    clearly indicated it WAS a meeting with high-level Russians.


    This strongly suggests that Fusion GPS was involved in a dirty tricks
    campaign that sought to question and undermine Trump’s loyalty to the country
    by portraying him as a having close ties to the Kremlin, a tactic that has emerged as a primary point
    of opposition to candidate and now President Trump.

    No evidence in any way connects Fusion GPS to the meeting between
    Trump Jr. and the Russians. Nothing except you asserting it
    to create your stupid little conspiracy theory.


    The facts are clear. The effort to overturn the Maginstky Act
    was run by F GPS and the russian woman.

    Particularly troubling is how early the Democratic Party operatives appear
    to have been conspiring to make the Russia-Trump connection.

    LOL. At least half-a-dozen of Trump's people have been *proved*
    to not only have Russian connections, but to have LIED about their connections at least once to boot.


    You are wearing russian colored glasses.
    Jeff Sessions told the russians to fuck off many times.

    No one needed to "conspire" to make it "appear" that Trump had
    Russia connections. Jesus, his staff had so many Russia connections
    it's almost hard to find one of his major appointees or staff members
    who DIDN'T have Russia connections. :)


    So did the other side.
    Robert Mueller delivered the uranium samples to Russia.


    These revelations bring to light for the first time the likely involvement
    of Democratic operatives in fomenting the Russia-Trump collusion conspiracy theory that is now the subject of multiple Federal and Congressional investigations, which have had
    the (convenient) effect of slowing Trump’s legislative agenda.

    Indeed, the fact that the DNC knew, but kept secret, the fact that Russian
    hackers were responsible for their computer breach at around the same time that
    Democratic operatives began funding the group that would go on to broker a meeting between
    Trump’s inner circle and a high-profile Russian national appears highly sinister.

    Indeed, you have NOT shown some unknown "Democratic operatives"
    brokered the meeting between Donnie Jr and the Russians. Jesus.
    That's pure bunk.


    Fusion GPS

    The DNC probably didn't want to advertise they had been hacked until
    they had time to look into it themselves, that's all. It makes them

    [continued in next message]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From Jeremy H. Denisovan@1:229/2 to All on Wednesday, September 06, 2017 17:56:41
    From: david.j.worrell@gmail.com

    Dear Lord, it's me... Donald.

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/uma0qw6ik62r07l/prays.jpg?dl=0

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From thang ornerythinchus@1:229/2 to david.j.worrell@gmail.com on Friday, September 08, 2017 06:41:30
    From: thangolossus@gmail.com

    On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 17:56:41 -0700 (PDT), "Jeremy H. Denisovan" <david.j.worrell@gmail.com> wrote:

    Dear Lord, it's me... Donald.

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/uma0qw6ik62r07l/prays.jpg?dl=0

    Lol. This man, and his coterie, look like some sort of third world autocracy-in-the-making.

    Imagine the future of the US - a boot eternally stamping on a human
    face...

    (was: "If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on
    a human face - forever.")

    ---
    This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From Jeremy H. Donovan@1:229/2 to All on Tuesday, September 12, 2017 19:17:24
    From: jeremyhdonovan@gmail.com

    Vicente Fox for President of the US!

    https://youtu.be/-ukv9v7IGZw

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From Jeremy H. Denisovan@1:229/2 to All on Thursday, September 21, 2017 15:37:00
    From: david.j.worrell@gmail.com

    BREAKING NEWS

    Thursday, September 21, 2017

    Under growing pressure from Congress and the public to reveal
    more about the spread of covert Russian propaganda on Facebook,
    the company said on Thursday it was turning over more than 3,000
    Russia-linked ads to the Senate and House intelligence committees,
    which are investigating the Kremlin’s influence operation on the 2016 presidential election.

    The high-profile announcement came after Facebook spent two weeks
    on the defensive amid calls for greater transparency about 470
    Russia-linked accounts the company took down after they had
    promoted inflammatory messages on divisive issues.

    ***

    Over 3,000 Russia-linked Facebook ads. Hmmm...
    That's what I thought. I kept seeing bizarre shit.

    Colbert communes with Hillary:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trsfoQlM0ts https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoMhBo8ATBM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZQXncso6Gg

    My partner and I are still a bit pissed at Clinton for not making
    damn sure to beat the crazy orange demon spawn in spite of all the
    cheating and insane distortion that went on. But the more I think
    about it the more I wonder if... maybe it's *better* this way,
    to get this insane anachronistic attempt to return to the damn
    McCarthy era OUT of the American system, by getting it totally
    out in the open so it becomes clear to everyone how completely
    lame, nasty, and counter-productive all that shit really is.

    I am hoping this is truly its death-rattle. Maybe it all needed
    to happen again before we can move on to the next century properly.
    I still have a hard time believing THAT MANY of us are THAT crazy,
    but maybe it was necessary to drag it all out in the open again
    before we can all finally leave it behind.

    ***

    I don't know... what do you think, Andy?

    I think it is offensive and unfair to call Donald Trump a white
    supremacist. No one has done more than he has to prove that
    white people are not superior.

    And Steve Bannon is wrong that firing Comey was the biggest mistake
    in modern political history. Electing Trump wins that one hands down.

    I am far less disturbed by Ivanka calling Trump 'Daddy'
    than by all the people calling him 'President.'

    Breaking:
    Mueller Rents Giant Warehouse to Store Evidence Against Trump

    It's tempting to just blame Donald J. Trump for retweeting
    an animation depicting him committing violence against a woman,
    but there's something deeply wrong with a country that allows
    a person who does that to remain in office.

    Note to TV networks: I do not want to see Sean Spicer, Anthony
    Scaramucci, or Steve Bannon on TV again unless they are on trial.

    Jared Kushner Calls Kim Jong-un “Totally Unqualified Person”
    Who Only Got Job Through Nepotism

    Kushner noted that, instead of working his way up and acquiring
    the skills necessary to do his job, the North Korean leader had
    been given huge responsibilities and power “only because of
    family connections.”

    “I mean, why would you let someone with no experience in foreign
    affairs anywhere near such important decisions?” Kushner said.

    Breaking:
    Election Fraud Study Finds Massive Fraud was Elected

    Controversy Flares after Namibia Pronounces Trump's Name "Asshole"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From everyintention@1:229/2 to All on Thursday, September 21, 2017 18:52:22
    From: allreadydun@gmail.com

    aha ha pics of guys: "I'm with her"
    good one. Stephen Stephen.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)