>>4925476 PB

Re digging on Matt Osborne and generating a graphic

Didn't respond earlier but yes, Matt Osbourn is worth a dig.

Two things BTW:

1. There's also that Tennessee election thing that I can't remember teh details on but I bet you do–will come around again. Now we've got Alabama and Tenn. How many other states has someone done "experiments" in? If this guy Osbourne has done propos against Rush, how big does the net go, anyways???

Anons know very well that all these people who claim to be experts in detecting disinformation are really experts in executing it. That's why they know so much. They have a lot of practice.

When they get caught, they say, "We have to do this because the GOP does it." (The Devil made me do it.)

1. Your graphic "as is" is amazingly conceived and very clear. But you mentioned not having the software to do certain things you would like to do. I have Illustrator, which can probably do most things (the main limitations lie with this operator's skills, not the program). I'd be happy to generate something for you, if that would be useful. Could go back and forth getting it straight, no problem, let me know.

>>4925954

You should have spoken up during the last bread. Anon wants to post a series and seeks out congenial bakers, which he is free to do. Hard call, I stayed out of it but wondered whether someone would discuss.

>>4925971

Are my fellow correspondent on election meddling? If so , I sent you a message here >>4925948

In any event, wish you the best for the changed circumstances.

>>4926019

My phone works, anon. WA state. (But I had to plug it in because I use so rarely now!)

>>4926039

Sounds like this just happened. So sorry to hear of your misfortune. But as you know, things are often not what they seem. Getting thru the initial shock is half the battle.

I just want to say, by way of encouragement, how very helpful your work has been here. And I don't even know the half of it, just what I am seeing right now.

Sometimes when you do something truly significant–and I do believe your work is that significant–a lot of energy comes up around it. It happened for me two nights ago when–as you may recall-I couldn't seem to get anything right. Two mistakes, one of which I couldn't seem to apologize for enough! I hate to put our misinformation with so many depending on it here. Was extremely painful for me to contemplate, although it did not perhaps have as negative effect as it seemed in the moment.

Many of us believe we are here because it is a calling. A shill made fun of me for saying that, but I know it's true, because I never even heard of 8chan a year ago! When following such a call, unusual obstacles can arise. Perhaps you can think of those obstacles as an indication that you are truly on the right track.

If for some reason you end up off the boards for awhile, if you come back, put a "22" in your message if you want. I'd like to know you're ok.

P.S. Your charts are great as they stand!

>>4926110

I wasn't the baking but I watched the baker try to decide what to do. One reason I don't bake–don't have enough background in many areas relevant to this board. I so respect what the bakers do because I see how difficult it is "WHEN SHILLS ATTACK." (Or even anons; we are not always so easy to deal with, are we?)

>>4926099

Anon, it looks like just ONE person posting the same series. And your theory of baker-shill collusion seems far-fetched. Try occam's razor, will you? Unless of course you yourself are a shill. In which case, carry on. Good division-fagging!

>>4926145

kalbi-marinated flank steak last week.

>>4926157

I like it, anon. Posted before?

Baker, possible Notable?

Here's my latest response to shills/anons who complain.

>>4926176

>>4926157

>>4926166

When someone expresses doubt, fear or concern, if they don't look like an obvious shill, I tend to give encouragement ONCE and look for the response. People with real concerns will respond very differently than shills.

>>4926208

As far as I know, this material we are currently digging on does not exist anywhere else. Or if it does, it's not being published in a way that would tell the pubic about what's really going on. They are only releasing it because they can no longer hide it completely.

One thing this digg makes clear: this info is being dribbled out in a way designed to hide more than it reveals, e.g.:

• WaPo and NYT apparently have copies of some of these mystery reports but choose not to publish them.

• Nobody really calls out Shane for not revealing in his SLEW of articles (including one mega-article put out I think in mid-December) that he attended the Sept mtg at AET.

• No one makes charts like yours or mine; they don't even try. And they have a lot more info. Guess they're just lazy, huh?

• All the MSM articles still shore up "muh Russia" big-time; retaining this lie as the centerpiece for all their stories tells us not to trust most of what they are saying.

• And then there is the SSCI, the spider at the center of the web, I'm guessing. They get interested in some project but apparently don't fund it. No matter, millions of dollars seem to arrive from private donors. Sweet deal, huh? Bet they have lots of friends with Marshall Fund ties.

(Which reminds me, I really ought to watch to two people at the head of the ASD, because they are in a lot of videos. Seriously procrastinating. Deep State TV isn't my cup of tea.)

>>4926314

I use Illustrator, but it's an expensive option unless you're a student or have an old copy that's "rent-free".

>>4926309

I have the TV on silently in the background–you know, in case any midnight arrests. The screen finally came on. Nice scenes of moutains and stuff, but also a little news. What do we get? The same story I saw on Water's World about an alligator as a "support animal." Wow, twice in one day.

Here you're quoting Wilson about the cabal (and he ought to know!), Twain, etc.–and the MSM is imparting news on support alligators.

LMAO.

>>4926369

meant screensaver came on

>>4926309

>>4926309

Thought to do a little digg on current events at he SSCI. First thing I found was this recent Q drop (attached).

Starts like this:

When will the public discover that Ted Cruz was also illegally SURV (pre_POTUS_R nomination)?

C_A 'illegal' SURV members of Congress?

C_A 'illegal' SURV members of the Press?

C_A 'illegal' SURV SENATE INTEL COMM?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/sep/10/cia-senate-investigation-constitutional-crisis-daniel-jones📁

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/01/world/senate-intelligence-commitee-cia-interrogation-report.html

Daniel Jones, probably our friend from TDIP. Something about a report on torture causing conflict between the CIA and SSCI (too late to really read it, also very long).

But Q just dropped it couple of weeks ago, it somehow passed me by. Possibly relevant, so I'm passing it along. The Q drop talks a lot about Snowden, too; reminded me of the SSCI's pointed interest in Julian Assange.

>>4926467

LMAO.

>>4926485

Then Pelosi should be especially interested in this! (Everything you ever wanted to know about Muh Russia election meddling)

ALL PAST BREAD, phonefags be warned!

>>>4925158, >>4925161, >>4925165 Mapping Muh Russia and Election Meddling connections Version 1/27/19

>>4925309 , >>4925420, >>4925595 Moar on Muh Russian & Election Meddling

>>4926494 Suggest some context for >>4926466:

This post is part of a conversation begun in previous bread on the connections between the SSCI and an ex-SSCI Demo staffer, Daniel Jones, who initiates a The Democracy Integrity Project (TDIP) that has been working in with both Jonathon Morgan's New Knowledge and the SSCI. We are trying to find out moar about Jones' current connections with the SSCI.

For moar, plz see pb:

>>4925158, >>4925161, >>4925165 Mapping Muh Russia and Election Meddling connections Version 1/27/19

>>4926506

Truth be told, she looks more frumpy than sexy. Ten league boots.

>>4926570

I thought you might just add it right after >>496466

How about >>4926466, >>4926538

The SSCI, Daniel Jones & Q Drop 2657

not Shakespeare but sort of covers the territory

>>4926620

Often the way I feel on this board. Kek.

>>4926635

I especially like the "name your price" part. Too bad they can't get the lady that used to do the Fruit of the Loom commercials years ago.

>>4926561

Still NIGHT (that for all those am faggots that don't still see a dark sky!!!

I have to say, I didn't know a damn thing about 8chan when coming on night shift. (You have to start somewhere, and day shift is full of flying bread.)