I spent Friday helping to spread mulch at my parent's house. That's not a metaphor, but it fits.
My father ( not well ) spent the day sleeping in front of the tv, set on CNN. No wonder he can parrot the daily mantra, it's sleep learning!
Imagine the transcript of your dream/tv input, sleeping with CNN on, high volume, a constant stream of bile, breathless conspiracy theories based on selected segments of notes taken out of context, and with now typical CNN total bias against truth, justice, and the American way, with a chunky peanut butter coating of Clinton Campaign paid political opposition research from Vladimir Putin's State Security Propaganda arm.
That's the report. Nightmare disconnected rumors arranged to suit a script.
And many of the "notes" referenced, really have me imagining a dark room, bright lights in the eyes of an unshaven man, in a rumpled suit, in a steel chair bolted to the floor, a typist behind mirrored glass, and a baritone voice, threatening the sweating witness with the arrest of his children, and suggesting the contents of a "note" of a meeting he wasn't there for, a year ago.
And my imagination, fuelled by spy and POW movies, is probably lacking in the true horror of these "interviews".
That's my initial impression.
I quit making notes on known lies from Obama administration minions after 11 pages.
On a completely different subject, for a break, I took one of those "most people can't get 40% on this World War 2 quiz!" Clickbaits. I did get one answer wrong, going for speed, about the battle of Leyte Gulf. My fault, if I'd been paying attention... And found two errors in the quiz explanations that are common myths that I have documented testimony are bull. Example, the Grumman F6F was made to fight the Zero. Incorrect. It was in development about a year before the Zero was encountered.
I looked at Wikipedia to see if it was the Hellcat and it is. Also says that it was to counter the Zero and was started in 1938!! They must hire NYT checkers.
Wikipedia,on political matters, is pure propaganda.
Partisan, too.
You have to realize that you can change the content of the articles. You do need to sign up, which requires... Nothing.
You may know nothing about cashews, but you can insert a paragraph about the health benefits of them, without any proof, documentation, or facts, at all. Some other guy can ask for your stuff to be erased, and his rant on neocolonial exploitation put in. A committee, perhaps just one teen age girl in Bismarck, will decide. How do you get on a committee? You ask.
Every politician's page is written the same way. A group effort from his campaign staff, often submitted by paid political writers. Or his enemy's campaign staff.
Wikipedia is NOT a legitimate reference source, it's a slow blog comment section, moderated by volunteers. (citation needed )
Every politician's page is written the same way. A group effort from his campaign staff, often submitted by paid political writers. Or his enemy's campaign staff.
Actually, it came out recently that many famous people, and certainly politicians were paying Wikipedia for editors who would keep their pages in line with their desired narrative. Might as well just provide a link to their own URL.
The interview with Congressman Ratcliffe linked to below runs about 17 minutes. There's a "commercial break" you can skip (fast forward through) that runs from apx. 9:15 to apx. 12:15.
quote:
Sunday Talks: Rep John Ratcliffe Discusses The Weissmann/Mueller Report CTH - April 21, 2019
Oddly, neither Fox News nor anyone else captured the individual interviews on "Sunday Morning Futures" today. However, at the beginning of this scraped video Maria Bartiromo discusses the Weissmann/Mueller report with Congressman John Ratcliffe.
Rep. Ratcliffe is an important voice to consider because he is one of the few representatives who has viewed all of the redacted and classified documents behind ‘Spygate’. Ratcliffe contemplates many of the questions that many people have about the origin of the Trump surveillance operation.
Ratcliffe also mentions that Robert Mueller has been invited to testify before the House Judiciary Committee on May 22nd or May 23rd. It will be interesting to see if that ever happens. It is brutally obvious how no Democrats are demanding his urgent testimony despite the importance they attribute to his report. We can conclude that it must be considered against their interests for Mueller to take questions in public.
Note that Congressman Ratcliffe, because of his job title, has seen EVERYTHING, from the very beginning of Spygate, in its uncensored, unredacted form.
Listen to his choice of words carefully. It doesn't take much reading between his lines to know that justice comes...
The walls are closing in on 0bama By Thomas Lifson - April 24, 2019
The truth of violations of law by the 0bama White House, long buried, is being excavated by two private groups.
Judicial Watch has obtained testimony from a top FBI official that the Hillary home brew server emails were found in the White House. This means that Barrack 0bama’s illegal handling of classified information contained in those emails is closer to being exposed. This implicates him in the same felonies committed by Hillary Clinton that James Comey falsely claimed “no reasonable prosecutor” would pursue.
[snip]
A second scandal threat for the 0bama administration is also slowly being excavated. Proof is piling up that White House operatives exploited the NSA’s surveillance of all electronic communications in the United States to monitor political opponents. This very long and detailed post by Sundance of Conservative Tree House defies any possibility of concise summary. But by putting together information form the Mueller Report with a ruling by FISA Court Judge Rosemary Collyer, Sundance teases out the clear implications. This requires time and focus to follow, but is rewarded by a deeper understanding of how the 0bama administration actually did spy on its opponents, not just on the Trump campaign.
This is old news for anyone who digs for their news.
This is NEW news for most normies, however, and part of the slow-but-deliberate "awakening" (red-pilling) process necessary to lay naked the many emperors.
I hope it offends Barr enough that he does something about it.
The "something" has already been happening (Horowitz).
I've been studying up on AG Barr. He is endorsed by a lot of legal heavy-hitters, including attorneys Joe DeGenova and his wife Victoria Toensing; the fireworks begin at 1:27:
This video - a panel discussion hosted by Gov. Mike Huckabee and featuring Joe diGenova, Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Robert Ray - has been popping up all over the interwebs since the segment was first aired on FOX News last night. Some heavy hitters in the online Real News Media are pointing with much vigor (rightly so, IMO) at this clip.
Mr. diGenova's words, in particular, hint strongly of the Big Ugly that is coming soon to a theater near you; listen carefully and you'll readily hear several very loud booms.
Begin at exactly 11:00 (when the panel is introduced by Gov. Huckabee) and watch until at least the 20:00 mark or so. Don't miss what Mr. diGenova says about Adm. Mike Rogers at 19:15:
Fox itself pulls a lot of these. The poster didn’t have permission to use their material. Short clips likely constitute fair use, but whole segments with no commentary is just theft, in their lawyers’ eyes.
The only pundit I heard that predicted the 2008 house loan "crisis" was Glenn Beck. Accurately!
He doesn't count since he predicts disaster daily, so he's been wrong far more often than right, but he deserves real credit for predicting, explaining the How & why, and accurately commenting on the ( still ongoing! ) theft of your money to pay for the incredible fraud of selling mortgage debt as money making bonds, with lies about their contents.
I have no idea who actually owns my house. That debt was sold long ago. Probably your retirement plan.
But pundits aside, in 2008 the Wall Street Journal reported that only 13 economists correctly predicted the crisis.
A sane human would ask why we should listen to anyone else? The vast majority of the experts got it wrong.
And that has not changed in the decade+ since. Most, almost all, if the economist experts have been wrong. Repeatedly.
I had the good fortune of meeting Joe DiGenova and his wife Victoria Toensing this past Summer. Got to talk to him for a while as we were walking a ways from the gate of the Chautauqua Institute to our cars. He is VERY angry about all the shenanigans going on, and mixes no words, "dirty Communists" he says.